Changing the Second Amendment

Liberals, if they see an impediment to their complete takeover of the government, making it a dictatorship with them always in charge, they want to “move the goalposts.” They’d like to eliminate the First, AND the Second Amendments to the Constitution because the First allows conservatives to say the truth (if demonstrators and college students don’t drown them out), while the Second assures they will not be able to just “walk over” us in their quest for power. The First also guarantees a free press, although today’s liberal media “self-censors,” adhering to liberal-dictated “speech,” where people are only allowed to use “approved words” or are castigated for not using them. The Second assures we will be able to maintain (mostly) the First, by guaranteeing our right to “bear arms” in self defense, even against our own government, if necessary. They want to “modify” both Amendments, but both are “yes or no” questions. Either we have to right to say what we wish without fearing government action, or we’re not. In the Second, either we’re allowed to “bear arms,” or we’re not. There is no “modifying” them without eliminating them, altogether—and that’s exactly what liberals want. (Just common sense)