I am for some gun control, but I also believe in the Constitution. I can be convinced that in order to preserve the Constitution, there should be less rules restricting them..granted it would take some debate, but the Constitution comes 1st. My question is: how can a Conservative use the Constitution to ensure the right to bear arms and be OK with the government reducing any citizen’s rights in order to combat terrorism. How can they be so rightious about one article of the Constitution and decide other articles have less importance and call themselves patriots? How can a Conservative support what the Patriot Act can do to our liberties? Is one freedom less important than another?
I’m actually in favor of gun controls, but the Constitution guarantees the right ot bear arms and not have our correspondence monitored and not be imprisoned without due process…if the right to the due process and privacy disappear, the right to bear arms will be meaningless…the government (let’s say an evil one) will simply listen to everyone’s phones, e-mails, and snail mail and swoop down and destroy the oppostion before they could organize. I believe the right to bear arms was originally intended to give the citizens a fighting chance against a government gone bad and to protect one’s person
to my way of thinking, a real American patriot is LESS concerned about the government institutions regulating American life and more concerned about the meaning meanings behind the Constitution…freedom tyranny in all it’s forms….How has politics managed to separate the articles of the Constution into the important ones and the not so important ones? (rhetorical question)
sorry, should say "freedom from tyranny in all its forms"