Stanc

[grayfox]

It's not just that we have the 2A, but why: as in, what was behind the founders' reasons etc. Some of that is dependent on research and debate since none of us were actually there, but there is a foundational aspect of the USA "experiment" that stands out from other countries, especially at that time... and that is the statement/ belief that personal human rights come from God, not from the King or from govt. Jefferson's use of the term "laws of Nature and of nature's God" is a direct reference back to one of his main mentors, Bolingbroke, who coined that phrase and meant it to refer to the works of God and the word of God.
I'm told (altho I have not read it) that the Russian "constitution" has the same set of "rights" as our Constitution, except that they are subject to the govt giving them to the people... this was supposedly true of the USSR constitution... it simply underscores that behind the piece of paper is a line of reasoning --- and ours is that rights come directly from God (not though an intermediary such as King or the State), and that governments are instituted among men to secure those rights. ie, to protect and ensure them. Not to grant them. Governments are imperfect even as we humans are imperfect, but that is the stated goal.
Our own personal beliefs may or may not align with that reasoning, but that is what the founders intended as far as I can tell.
That's how I read what underscores our rights, and the 2A is "second among equals" as far as the BoR.