the tension vis a vis guns/abortion is pretty interesting. i think the Court is a little inconsistent with its rationale between the two (and I know they're different rights at issue), but still. are we taking a tight reading of the 14th or no? are we taking a tight reading of the 2nd or no?
likewise, i think the "abortions will still happen" argument is cousins with the pro-gunners who say "outlawing guns means only outlaws will get guns."
i find myself nodding with a lot of what i read in the opinion today (stare decisis notwithstanding), but it seems at odds with the thrust of yesterday's big opinion.