A good one via the Radio Equalizer, and a perfect illustration of my point last night about how gun-rights supporters have won the national debate on this issue. A law-abiding citizen has the right to protect himself, especially when the police can’t protect him: In a sane world, there’d be nothing partisan about that point of view. And increasingly, there isn’t.

Speaking of self-defense, and in light of the good reverend’s surprise that his audience might feel this way, for your companion reading I want you to dive into the history lesson tucked away in Clarence Thomas’s concurrence in Monday’s gun-rights decision. Scroll down to page 41 of his opinion (page 107 of 214 in the total PDF document) and go from there. Remember, this was a case about whether the Fourteenth Amendment, which was passed after the Civil War to protect the rights of blacks against racist state governments, guarantees the right to bear arms to an American citizen when the local authorities try to take it away. Thomas’s answer: How could it not, when grabbing guns from slaves and freed slaves was one of the chief means used by states to keep blacks powerless? So striking was Thomas’s argument on this point that WaPo columnist Courtland Milloy — who was last seen threatening to punch tea partiers in the face — wrote a near love letter to him in today’s edition. It is the guns that unite us, my friends. Exit question: Thomas’s finest hour?