There is some truth in the idea that amendments don't protect people's rights, people protect people's rights, but constitutional law can be very helpful in the effort. If a hard totalitarian government, or even just "soft" creeping statism starts ignoring people's constitutional rights the constitution might become just an ignored peace of paper, or our constitutional rights could be formally amended away. This applies to all of our constitutional rights not just the 2nd amendment. It applies equally to the 1st amendment rights, which have already been infringed on by "soft" creeping statism. But still having the right stated in the constitution does provide some amount of legal protection, and also a degree of social and rhetorical support for defenders or these rights.
Tim, the reason I engage every now and again on this subject is because it interests me how people hold on to the second amendment as though it were the very essence of life. People who are not constitutional scholars by a long shot act like this is a monumental question. I find that curious.
It isn't the essence of life but it is an important constitutional right. Up there with first amendment rights. The way we protect our other rights is through words, or (at least in a last resort) by violent action. Free speech and the right to bear arms are important cornerstones protecting all of our other rights.
The hard way we've already discussed. Some really bad guys take over the government and weapons in the hands of citizens are a threat to them so they ban them using any means necessary. In that case, all the constitutional amendments in the world won't protect your right to bear arms. Do you really think they would care what the constitution says? They'd probably have already banned the constitution before then banned guns. Whatcha gonna do about it?
The fact that guns aren't banned now, and that we have literally hundreds of millions of them out there, means that there will still be a lot out there even if the government tries to ban them. The idea of 2nd amendment rights not only makes a ban less likely, it helps instill the idea that we have and should have such a right and helps create a condition where it will never be easy or perhaps even possible for the government to disarm the population.
The soft way is that we the people would choose it. We would install legislators and judges who were anti-gun and effect the change through democratic means. We might even amend the amendment to the constitution if we thought it helpful or symbolically important. Whatcha gonna do about it?
The existence of the 2nd amendment makes the "soft" way much more difficult. Of course any amendment can be ignored or revoked through another amendment, but that just means the protection is imperfect not non-existent.
Tim |
