[no-s]

But if he does manage to change the Constitution, then we conservatives should ACCEPT that, for he played by the rules, and defeated us.

No, not even then. The Constitution is intended to limit the power and authority of the government. Using it to limit the rights of the people is turning it upside down. Just because a majority vote enables tyranny is not sufficient reason to go along with it quietly....

[JRandomFreeper]

The Constitution is intended to limit the power and authority of the government. Using it to limit the rights of the people is turning it upside down.

Absolutely correct, and AMEN!

It's a shame more conservatives don't get that.

/johnny

[BobL]

Well, if the Constitution no longer protects gun rights, then we live with that. My point is that we will not lose any battle over changing the Second Amendment, it’s not even close to being a long-shot. But I’d MUCH RATHER have the liberals attacking the Second Amendment and trying to change it, instead of using judges to simply IGNORE it and pass all the laws they want, as if it never existed.