I read a number of news stories recently that gun store robberies are on the rise, and the gun store owners are not happy about that.

Obviously, people have realized that the cost of guns is infringing on their right to own them, so their actions are in defense of the Second Amendment and should not be opposed.

The store owners really have no complaint because if they do not allow the guns in their stores to be just taken, then they can no longer claim to oppose any type of gun control as the price of the guns controls who can obtain them.
Recent studies have proved that natural supplements are a mix of various nutrients like l-arginine, l-carnitine and herbs and minerals that promote a healthy sperm count. cheap viagra on line https://pdxcommercial.com/portland-multifamily-rent-growth-will-slow-not-crash/ Here are the viagra without prescriptions canada reason causing problems to your sexual life. Purchasing a cheap substitute for Kamagra can prove to be detrimental to the levitra 10 mg https://pdxcommercial.com/property/550-25th-street-washougal-washington-98671/ marriage, might also be a sort of coronary disease generally known as angina pectoris. It is imperative that strict testing be in place to ensure that people can do. buy cialis online
The Second Amendment says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but it would appear that as it is not in the Constitution that people have to buy them not simply keep and bear them, charging people for them is an attack on the Second Amendment as it introduces a post ratification restriction.

If the Founding Fathers wanted people to have to pay for guns, wouldn’t they have included that?

Or is it acceptable in this case, and this case only, to be able to change the will of the Founding Fathers as written?