Constitution: Buffet Style!

Ok,

So in probably the most controversial issues of the year and possibly the decade, the Supreme Court is taking up the issue of guns. On the one hand the District of Columbia is arguing for the regulation of handguns. Look at Columbine, the countless other school shootings, mall shootings, church shootings, Virginia Tech. It seems that people have lost their damn minds just shooting all types of innocent people just because they are too cowardly to grow up and face the world like an adult. Life sucks and it is not fair. GROW UP AND DEAL WITH IT! So you didn't get the job/grade you wanted, that doesn't give you the right to go out and shoot ten billion people just so you can be famous. And to this extent the District of Columbia's position makes sense. In theory. On the other hand is Mr Heller who is a 65 year old security guard who lives in a poor section of DC who wants to own a handgun for self defense. Unfortunately for him this is outlawed in DC which he claims is a violation of his second amendment right to bear arms. So here is my problem with the whole issue. Besides the fact that it is too easy for the criminal element and immature kids to obtain weapons think about the old saying "when guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have guns". I personally don't own a gun but this controversy makes me think twice about getting one. I mean seriously. If the average, responsible citizen (with gun safes, trigger locks, etc.) cannot own a gun then what are we supposed to do when attacked? Wait for the police, file a report, and hope that the offender (if caught) doesn't get off on a technicality? But I digress. I am not trying to become right wing by any stretch of the imagination but I am disturbed by the arguments the lawyers for DC are making. They argue that the " court should avoid turning every phrase of the Second Amendment into a 'libertarian right.' A well-regulated militia isn't about everyone owning a gun willy-nilly. The Constitution does not create some kind of sacred, fundamental right to guns. If there's a right here at all, he says, it's at the "penumbra of the periphery" of the Constitution: in a shack behind the river where the other unenumerated rights huddle." When did the Constitution become a buffet? Last time I checked the Constitution was only the foundation of our country. I find it interesting that anytime some nutcase wants to make an outrageous claim, burn the flag, call our brave soldiers homosexuals, or insult common morality we just have to sit back and take it because it is protected by the "sanctity of the First Amendment (right to free speech)". However, when people want to own a gun that is protected by the Second Amendment, that belief is assaulted and those people are relegated to the "periphery". If the Constitution has become nothing more than a buffet to pick and choose from, then our nation is seriously in trouble.