Originally Posted by Idaho_Shooter
Originally Posted by The_Real_Hawkeye
The Second Amendment is more than a mere amendment to the Constitution. It's foundational to the legitimacy of the government the Constitution brought into existence, absent which (therefore) said government ceases to be legitimate. You see, the reason it's not a mere amendment is that it's actually one of the ten planks of the Bill of Rights, absent which the Constitution would not have been ratified in the first place, i.e., it was ratified on the condition that a Bill of Rights would be attached, which stipulation all parties agreed to, one of which plank was required to have been a statement regarding the right of the people to keep and bear arms being inviolate. The amendment process was merely the method by which they chose to attach the Bill of Rights to the Constitution.

So, is it your contention that the "Bill of Rights" is immune somehow from being amended?

Care to expound on the legal theory behind that?
Fully explained above. Read it again.