Tim Walz: “There’s no guarantee to free speech”
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (43)
sorted by:
That’s why the second comes after the first.
Many feel the Second Amendment should be first; and should read more like "The right of law-abiding People to keep and bear arms and ammunition shall not be infringed, limited, removed, revoked, or reduced in any way, by anyone, at any time."
This God-given human right to self protection should come first in the Bill of Rights because without it, none of the other rights have any permanency or weight.
They'll just modify "law abiding" and take your weapons. That's why that term is not used in the Constitution
Maybe, maybe not
I don't need a violent felon having the same access to firearms as the good people trying to protect themselves from him, who are law abiding
I believe that's how the supreme court sees it also. The key is to watch how they manipulate the law to expand who they want to remove rights away from. You can be a convicted felon and your 4th amendment rights remain in place unless you're on parole. It's a very delicate balance