The Importance Of The Right To Bear Arms

The application of natural rights allows every citizen of the United States of America to have equal and inalienable protections from the government that created them. Although debated on where the line is drawn, Americans know that they have the Freedom of Speech, the Right to Refuse the Quartering of Soldiers, and the Right to Bear Arms. Actually the last one should go more like this; “a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed,” substantially different than the grotesquely abbreviated citation we are used to hearing. The amendment was designed to ensure a very specific circumstance: the people are allowed access to weapons in order to physically defend themselves against the hand of a tyrannical government.
The common argument is that we simply need to keep guns out of the hands of those who are dangerous with them. If this were a law passed as a bill rather than an amendment, restrictions would be simple and mostly determined by the party in power. However, as this is a constitutional, natural right of man, should the government possess the power to control the very laws that are designed to be protections against it? It is fair to assume that to restrict access of arms to criminals is bi-partisan, but as proven with other forms of paraphernalia (such as drugs), criminals will still get their hands on