&gt;One of the biggest reasons we have the second amendment is to deter tyranny from our own government. Are any of the nations without gun control tyrannizing their citizens. Call me crazy, but I think the risk of gun violence is a *lot* more prevalent than the risk of government tyranny. &gt;And while the constitution isn't written in stone, it's meant to be difficult so change to rights cannot be trampled with one fell swoop. If a majority of the country wanted it changed, it would have been long ago. I agree, I'm not gonna nullify any amendment without popular approval. I just think too many treat the constitution as a bible and formulate their entire ethical framework around the document. But even so, I'm not for changing the constitution without popular approval. Even if popular opinion is stubborn and irrational. &gt;Good luck getting people to give up a right that not only could protect them from tyranny The mindset that one has to protect one's self from danger is itself incredibly dangerous as it predisposes one to acting out in self-defense even when it is not required. &gt;can and does protect people 100,000+ times per year in defensive scenarios (according to the CDC) Again, nations with severe gun control don't seem to be dying in droves to gun violence. Could it be that limiting guns in circulation reduces gun crime?