It never ceases to amaze me how much value some Americans place on their constitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms. We have had many of our rights, all guaranteed by the Constitution, either watered down or rendered useless by legislation such as the Patriot Act, yet the response to any perceived infringement of Second Amendment rights is deafening, comparatively speaking. It worries me about the ease of which our elected representatives are able to suspend constitutionally-guaranteed rights in the name of providing security from terrorism or making it easier for law enforcement to make drug busts. In my mind, the only way constitutionally-guaranteed rights should be able to be changed is by amending the Constitution, which requires a lot of discussion and ratification by all 50 states. I do not believe our founding fathers intended for our constitutionally-guaranteed rights and protections to be so easily brushed aside as they have been and they would probably not understand why we would want to give them up. Well, I don’t believe most of us wanted these rights to be watered down or done away with, and I don’t believe any legislation that purports to do so is legal.

Unfortunately, in order to test whether or not legislation watering down constitutionally-guaranteed rights is legal, the new law must be adjudicated in our courts and must preferably make it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court for the final decision. I say “unfortunately” because these days our courts face many obstacles to this happening. If someone feels they were illegally searched during a drug bust or that other constitutionally-guaranteed rights were infringed, they must first insist on going to trial and not accept any plea deals. This can be a very difficult obstacle when prosecutors threaten excessively lengthy prison sentences for those who opt to go to trial, and plaintiffs must be prepared to go through a long appeals process, many times while sitting in jail. The other obstacle Americans must face in order to adjudicate their constitutionally-guaranteed rights is having the money to do so. Granted, there are many organizations more than willing to provide free representation if they feel someone has a strong constitutional infringement case. A lack of money should never stand in the way of any American trying to uphold their constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Then there’s the problem of the shortage of federal judges thanks to the Republican Party refusing to approve any of President Obama’s appointments to the federal bench (or to approve anything the President does without a fight). They do this even when the appointee is someone they normally would support if from any other president other than President Obama. This unnecessary obstructionism is unfathomable, unpatriotic and is hurting Americans (even Republican Americans) and our democracy.

We have to find some way to get around all these obstacles when it comes to our constitutionally-guaranteed rights. The main drawback of having a democracy of, by and for the people is that it requires constant vigilance and participation by the people and not just by their elected representatives. If we had to depend solely upon our elected representatives, we would have long ago lost our democracy.

No matter how frustrating maintaining our democracy can be, I believe it is well worth the effort since democracy is still better than any of the alternatives. We just can’t let it slip away while we’re not looking and we must demand that both individuals and entities (such as corporations) follow the rule of law.

Our job maintaining our democracy and upholding our constitutionally-guaranteed rights would be much easier if any weakening of those rights required an amendment to the Constitution. If you agree with me on this, please consider signing the petition I created on “We the People,” a new feature on WhiteHouse.gov. If this petition gets 25,000 signatures by February 12, 2013, the White House will review it and respond! Also, please forward the link to my petition to as many of your friends/family as you can. You can view and sign my petition here:

http://wh.gov/ECJz

Here's what my petition says (and I believe this issue crosses party lines and is something any American should want to support):

"Repeal the National Defense Authorization Act ("NDAA") As signed into law by President Obama on December 31, 2012

The People demand the immediate repeal of any and all provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act ("NDAA"), the Patriot Act, the Military Authorization Act, and any other Act or law, which dilutes or negates any rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights.

The Bill of Rights is the backbone of democracy, and any weakening of its protections changes the very nature of a government that is to be of, by and for the People. It is the shield that protects the People from tyrannical,oppressive government, and should never be weakened in any way except by amendment to the Constitution, ratified by all 50 states.