You ARE entitled to do the same. The process is even layed out in the Constitution.

First, you need to get Congress to propose an Amendment, or alternately, to call a Constitutional Convention. Note that the latter requires the vote of 2/3 of the States to do.

Then, you need to ratify the proposed Amendment. That requires the vote of 3/4 of the States.

Good luck with that on any attempt to modify the Bill of Rights....

You really have no idea. Go find a Mosin Nagant, an ancient Russian military rifle capable of hitting a target at over 200 yards with a high-power round for about $100.

As a matter of fact, I own one of those. And they're accurate a damn sight farther than two hundred yards.

As is my SMLE (a British Service Rifle, which cost me about $100). Note that the most annoying thing about the SMLE is that they used rimmed rounds, unlike everyone else in creation, who switched to rimless...

At the time there were limited arms (you took about 2 minutes to reload) vs able to empty a couple clips in that same amount of time, now.

Umm, no.

A flintlock could be fire three-four times a minute by a skilled shooter. One of Napoleon's guys could manage 12+ shots per minute....

It should also be noted that at the time, there was no internet, television, or radio. Should the First Amendment be interpreted to not apply to the internet, radio, or TV?

I don't mod up ignorance. What is considered a militia is well defined, and that doesn't cut it.

Yes, the militia is well defined. By the Militia Act, in fact.

Might want to read it sometime.

According to the Militia Act, *I* am a member of the militia.

And so are you, if you're a US Citizen who happens to be an adult male.

And so is every other adult male US Citizen except for active duty members of the Armed Forces and Congresscritters and the like.

No, you would not be arrested and charged for video taping someone stealing your car because you aren't recording a conversation.

Hmmm, if the car thief said something to his accomplice, would that make the recording illegal, hence inadmissable in court?

1. Kids shoot up schools. Why schools?

Because your targets are guaranteed to be unable to shoot back?

Well you had to live during the whole TMI episode to understand the panic it created.

I *was* alive then. And thought the whole business was blown waaaaay out of proportion.

The panic was induced by the anti-nuke mob that were looking for any excuse they could get to ban nuclear power.

And thanks to a President that was a complete dolt, they pretty much managed it....

A couple state legislatures (California and Vermont, I believe) have *already* passed bills calling for a constitutional convention to propose a new constitutional amendment that puts into law that corporations do not have the rights of people, and there is similar pending legislation in many other states.

If a couple of State legislatures have done this already, then they only need 32 more to get it done. Plus the vote by 38 States to make it a Constitutional Amendment, if they manage to get the Convention going.

A cautionary note: once a Constitutional Convention is called, there is absolutely NOTHING that requires it to stick to the stated purposes of said Convention. They can do pretty much whatever they want in the way of proposed Amendments....

For example, this is what the IRS might send you:

Why would they want to do that??

Your ignorance is useful to the people handling taxes - if you knew just how much you were sending to Washington in taxes, you might just start objecting to the whole thing...

And then where would they be?

The problem with the NSA is we have no idea what their capabilities are, technologically or legally.

Well, if you read all NSA-related legislation, you should have a good idea of their LEGAL capabilities are.

Which, unfortunately means reading basically ALL legislation passed since NSA was founded, since a rider could have been inserted into unrelated legislation quite easily.

They are clearly violating the constitution already and there seems to be no one willing or capable of stopping them.

There are several people CAPABLE of stopping them. The President, for one, being their boss. Congress can always just defund them.

Alas, neither the President nor Congress seems to be WILLING to stop them. Consider this carefully next time you pick a President/Senator/Congressman.

Oh, and try not to fall for the "hope and change" line again. It wasn't true when Obama said it, nor when Bush used his equivalent, nor when Clinton used his variation, nor when Reagan said words to that effect, nor when Nixon said it, nor when Johnson said it, nor Kennedy, nor....

ALL Presidential candidates (except the guys who were former VPs, who usually use a "we'll continue the hope and change of the last eight years") use a variation on that theme. ALL of them are lying.

Forbes artical says 150 deaths deaths/trillionkWhr from wind power, but your link cant find 150 total deaths in the history of wind power.

Total energy consuption in 2008 was 143,851 TWh, and wind in 2010 was 2.5% of the total energy generation (and growing fast), perhaps its was 1.25% in 2008. So 143851*0.0125 =1798 TWh from wind.

Your link says 150 deaths per TWh, which equates to 270,000 people beign killed eveyr year from wind power. Do you believe that ?

Umm, a TWhr (TeraWattHour) is NOT the same as "trillion KWhr". There are, in fact, 1000 TWhr in every "trillion KWhr".

There are simply far too many of us and we continue to multiply at an obscenely accelerating rate.

Well, no.

Whether there are too many of us is debatable, but it is NOT debatable that the rate of population increase has been decreasing steadily for decades.

Current projections show population peaking under 12 billion, and declining thereafter.

So, no, we're not continuing to multiply "at a obscenely accelerating rate".

So, I'll assume the rest of your rant is as devoid of fact as the part I quoted, and not waste time either reading or responding to it.

I'm willing to have a radio chip that I don't control inside my phone so long as I can turn that little fucker off when I want to.

So, you're willing to have a radio chip that you don't control inside your phone so long as you can control it?

Because they broke up and killed their crew one time in sixty

Yeah, we wanted something more reliable, like the Soyuz, which only killed the crew twice in 120 flights, and failed its mission only nine other times in 120 flights.

Unlike the Shuttle, which killed its crew twice in 135 missions, and failed its mission no other times in 135 missions....