If We Honor the Constitution, We Amend the Second Amendment

  If we place metal detectors in our schools, is that breaking the Second Amendment? If there is to be no law infringing on the right to keep and bear arms, then taking the weapons away upon entry of a school is preventing them from bearing arms.
 I've posited that it does not violate the Second Amendment. I've suggested property rights trump the right to bear arms on someone else's property.
   But, am I right. Yesterday, I looked at the Constitution. I didn't find what I wanted. In the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments, it does say no person shall be deprived of property without due process of law. But, we are not talking about taking their property away, but what rights they have when they have property.
  Then, there is the Fourth Amendment. It prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures. Rather than substantiating a person's right to prevent guns from being brought onto his property, the Fourth Amendment carries weight substantiating the right to bring guns onto another person's property.
  When we use metal detectors, does that amount to searches and seizures? I think a strong argument for that can be made.
  I think of all the churches and stores that do not allow people to bring guns onto their properties. I think of the metal detectors at airports. I wonder on this matter. I believe property owners should be allowed to dictate whether guns are brought on their properties. This seems, even, an inalienable right. And, I believe it wise that we do have metal detectors at airports.
  If the Constitution is ambiguous, or if it can be used to argue that property owners do not have these rights, then that Constitution should be changed. It dishonors the Constitution to practice against what it says, but it respects that blessed document when you take the provisions it itself offers for changes, and you make those changes. It does provide a way for amendments to be made, and we should make amendments when that is wise.
  If we can see property owners should be allowed to say whether guns will be brought onto their properties -- if we can see this is just and fair -- then we should have the courage to make laws equal to the justice. And, if the Constitution is where those changes must be made, we must have the courage and spine to make those changes.
   The Constitution was not meant to stand in the way of justice. If it can be construed that it in anyway is an impediment to justice, we do it no honor by arguing that it is so inspired that it should not be changed. It is so inspired that it provides a way for changes should they needed.
   If we honor the inspiration of the founding fathers, we make the changes necessary.