@fannybandit Yes it is

That's your opinion.

Freedom of speech doesnt apply to criminals or the right to vote so yes it is subject to limitations

You have an opinion, I have the writ of law.

@fannybandit It's a fact

Voting is not considered freedom of speech.

Laws that are wrong need to be changed

fuckface

Again, your opinion.

Which is inferior to a nation's rule of law.

fuckface

If you think law is above human opinion than how did those laws get there

then*

Morality and history.

They create ethics.

thats queer slang for someones opinion

No, that's considered lessons learned...something you fail to appreciate.

We became America through the right to keep and bear arms...the militia/minutemen.

yes lessons learned 300 years ago

They still apply today.

no you became American then you made the changes

they're called Amendments for a reason

Without the 2nd amendment, nothing could stop government from becoming absolutely tyrannical.

they werent in the original draft

That's the people's insurance policy against tyranny.

It's in the constitution, that's all that matters.

you know what, Prohibition was in the constitution - should we bring that back?

because it was law

and in the constitution

must mean its good

Wrong, it was a violation of the 4th amendment and enacting it in itself was unlawful.

No law can violate a person's rights...otherwise it is null and void.

it was enacted through legal means

it became nullified.

It was unlawful.

That was a lesson learned.

If you violate rights, the people suffer.

It never happened again.

Judicial precedence is of little regard as society evolves

Society evolves because of precedence.

you cant have 300 years of precedence and then think your nation will be the exact same