But what isn't normally noticed are their attacks on the other rights enumerated in the Constitution, especially the 1st, 4th and 5th.
1st Amendment: 45 Superman notes how the administration at the Community College of Allegheny County needed to be forced into litigation to allow a student to hand out pro-2A information while the Second Amendment Sisters were told they were likely to be shot as threats during an EMPTY holster protest.
4th Amendment: Support of gun control groups for "Safe Storage" laws. The only way this is enforceable, as has been shown recently in Australia, is through warrantless searches of homes by the authorities. To them, that is 'reasonable'. We also did not hear a peep out of them during the seizures of firearms by authorities during Katrina yet we regularly hear that they do not support bans or confiscations.
5th Amendment: Support of gun control groups for the removal of rights without due process by being put on error-laden and secret "Watchlists".
In an interesting side point to this, we also regularly hear gun control advocates endorse licensing and/or registration of firearms all in the name to reduce crime. What we DON'T hear are their criticisms/condemnations of US v Haynes which ruled that convicted felons can't be prosecuted for failing to register a firearm under the self-incrimination clause of the 5th Amendment yet they come out of the woodwork to condemn Heller v DC which recognized the 2nd as an individual right for non-prohibited persons. So are they more concerned with criminal or legal possession of firearms?
Obviously this opposition to numerous rights by gun control advocates is only as it regards to firearm owners. If it were to come down to their personal interests, I'm sure they would fight tooth and nail to maintain them.






