In all the talk of the 2nd Amendment, I've noticed that lots of people don't seem to understand what the Bill of Rights are and what they mean. The rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights are not granted to us by the government. They are, as it says in the Declaration of Independence, inalienable rights that exist outside of government. More than anything the rights are written out there so the government won't be able to restrict them. We the people loan the ability to govern to the government, and the Bill of Rights is basically the guidelines which the government must follow, or they lose their governing priviledges. When the Supreme Court ruled on the 2nd Amendment last week, the dissenting judges reasoned that the right to bear arms has to be balanced against the interests of local governments. That's BULLSHIT! Local governments cannot restrict our rights any more than the federal government. The right to bear arms is not a law, it is above laws. It is part of the United States in a way that if Congress or the Supreme Court restricted those rights, this would no longer be the United States of America, it would be a new country masquerading as the United States of America.

The Bill of Rights are not laws, they are rights intrinsic to humans, and the rest of the world would be better off if they acknowledged such. The Bill of Rights are above laws, they are the supreme law of the land, and any laws that restrict those rights are false laws.

Later Edit: The whole rights intrinsic to humans thing is making me rethink my stance on the recent Guantanamo case and several other things. If the rights enumerated in the Constitution's top ten list apply to all humanity, then how can I justify not giving due process to detainees? Of course the excuse is that Congress had set up a process for them, but the issue with that is the process never seemed to do anything. So I have a lot to think about.