Do you think that the Bill of Rights should be subservient to the right of the Federal government to provide for the common defense? I don't, for two reasons.
1) Our rights were there before the Constitution. The Bill of Rights does not say that it can be suspended.
2) For practical reasons, most our security is (or was) provided by the Bill of Rights. The second amendment even mentions it.
Wow!
If ever there was a case of three fingers pointing back at yourself, you are it when you point the finger at me.
I stated that your understanding was lacking. If you want to cry about that being an insult, go ahead.
I stated my position clearly and nothing that you said rebuts any of it. You still lack an understanding of what our Constitution is and what it's intent was and remains.
BTW, 'a more perfect union' was only meant to say that under the AoC, the 'union' was less than perfect because certain weaknesses existed. It did not create the Federal government as an all powerful new body to dictate to us or to the States. It can only do what it is specifically empowered to do and nothing more -- no matter what the necessity -- without the proper authorization of additional powers through the amendment process. And that process was not one to be taken lightly because of the risks involved with ceding more power to the government.