[NakedRampage]

The question is how that process will be used, by those in power and those who wish to see our freedoms stripped away.

If we set about to re-word #2 so as to add the words "the individual right to bear arms...", we'll more likely end up with a version that says "The governments right to determine an individual's right to own a bb gun." Do you trust our current GOP leadership? Do you doubt that they would sell out our most cherished freedoms in the blink of an eye? Because I don't.

[Huck]

Re: Second Amendment, I would simply remove the introductory clause, that has caused all the controversy. I would probably also add that no state or local governments can infringe either, rather than rely on substantive due process.

"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by any government under the jurisdiction of the United States."

You could take it one step further and define "arms." That would be nice.

[Huck]

1st amendment--I would revise the freedom of religion section, which also has gone badly awry. The establishment clause needs to be re-written and clarified. Something along the lines of:

The right of the people to freely exercise their religion shall not be infringed by any government under the jurisdiction of the United States, including expressions of faith occurring at public events or in public spaces.

[Huck]

we'll more likely end up with a version that says "The governments right to determine an individual's right to own a bb gun."

It would never make it out of the House.