Second Amendment also covers those in US illegally

[IronFist]

http://news.yahoo.com/court-people-us-illegally-carry-guns-164502032.html
Second Amendment is really too vague. The same goes to 14th amendment. So many decades have passed since it got introduced and yet it's not quite clear if illegal immigrants living in the US are "the people of America" or not. That's just ridiculous. We need to rewrite our constitution and include there all amendments which have to be adjusted to today's social norms.

[Classic Conservative]

No we don't the framers allowed a admendment process if you haven't heard yet??

[Blue3]

Rights are rights, not privileges granted by government.

If we call it a right, then that automatically means it legally extends to all persons.

And I don't think anyone would argue an illegal immigrant is not a person. I hope.

[Mr. Reactionary]

Not sure which evil rightwing position to take.

[Murica!]

Good as it means that they have the right to protect themselves from the State and nut jobs like the OP.

[Clark Kent]

The Second Amendment applies to everyone. I'm not sure what the issue is here.

[pho]

The Supreme Court has set a precedent that grants illegals constitutional rights so long as they reside under the jurisdiction of the United States and it's laws. The only ways around this are repealing the 14th amendment or deporting illegals outside the US jurisdiction.

[Simfan34]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Isn't this a contradiction of terms? How can illegal immigrants be residing under the laws of the United States? Wouldn't that necessitate their immigration to the United States not having been illegal?

[Blue3]

Our rights are recognized as human rights.

It's been prized as the shining example of what makes America great.

[PJ]

Let's not. The Bill of Rights and Reconstruction amendments are the best parts of our otherwise outdated constitution.

[Dereich]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Isn't this a contradiction of terms? How can illegal immigrants be residing under the laws of the United States? Wouldn't that necessitate their immigration to the United States not having been illegal?

Not really. The courts have ruled that the use of "the people" in the bill of rights refers to more than just citizens or residents. The first case I can think of on the topic is United_States v. Verdugo-Urquidez where the court said that the people "refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community." I don't know if a court has ruled on it before, but I could see illegal immigrants successfully arguing they have the sufficient connections required for those rights.