Originally posted by aldo_14
Surely that would depend on what that change was?
Sorry I'm a bit late, but I did want to respond to this. aldo, if you read the Bill of Rights, you'll see very little room for change, and as I said before, there is little to no public will to change any of it. Let me briefly look at the individual amendments, just to give you an idea of what I'm talking about. The First, as I'm sure you already know, provides for free speech, free press, free assembly, and freedom of religion. It is, without a doubt, the most revered portion of the Bill of Rights; it has never needed to be changed, and it should never be. I'll come back to the Second. The Third doesn't really apply anymore; it deals with the quartering of troops in private homes, which was a much bigger issue just after the Revolutionary War. The Fourth protects against "unreasonable searches and seizures" and requires "probable cause" for the issuance of police warrants. The Fifth provides for trial by grand jury, protects against double jeopardy, states that a person need not testify against himself (thus, "pleading the Fifth"), and guarantees "due process of law." The Sixth deals with trial proceedings, such as a "speedy and public" trial in front of an impartial jury, demands formal accusation of a crime, allows for calling witnesses and cross-examining opposing witnesses, and makes legal council mandatory. The Seventh deals with the requirement of a jury for civil cases in which the suit is for more than $20 (obviously, that particular point of it is relatively moot today), as well as stating that a fact "tried by a jury" cannot be re-examined later. The Eight protects against "cruel and unusual punishment." The Ninth and Tenth, taken together, do not specifically enumerate rights. The former states that the enumeration of certain rights in the Constitution does not mean that no other rights exist, and the latter, dealing with "reserved powers," states that all rights not granted specifically to the federal government or denied the states pass onto the states or the people in general.
Another important amendment that ties in with the Bill of Rights is the Fourteenth. This particular amendment contains both the "due process" and "equal protection" clauses; the former, like the Fifth Amendment, guarantees the "due process" of law for all American citizens, and the latter states that no citizen can be denied "equal protection" under the law. How does this tie in with the Bill of Rights? You see, as originally written, the Bill of Rights applies only to the Federal Government, not the states. However, through a number of Supreme Court cases, including some of the most well-known, the majority of the provisions of the Bill of Rights have been extended to cover the states through the equal protection/due process clauses. This includes the provisions of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments (I'm not sure about the Seventh; I think, in some states, a jury trial is not required for civil suits). You'll notice that I excluded the Second Amendment. In a certain Supreme Court case, the Court ruled that the Second Amendment did not apply to the states through the equal protection clause, meaning that individual states could enact restrictions on the ownership of firearms. It did not make any comment on the relevance of the amendment or the definition of "well-regulated militia."
This comes with a caveat, though. To the best of my knowledge and judgment, if a state attempted to ban all firearms, the case resulting from this would almost certainly be taken to the Supreme Court. I can honestly say that I don't think any such law would stand; I think that the Court would clarify their earlier ruling. That's just my personal opinion, though, and despite having an excellent Government teacher in high school, I'm far from an expert on constitutional law.
Sorry for going off-topic a little bit, but I thought that this might help some of our non-American forum-goers, and maybe some of my fellow Americans as well.
