How many people need to die before the constitution reigns?

Everybody knows about the 14 person death toll in California earlier this week.  Almost nobody knows of the content contained in
http://wethepeoplefoundation.org/projects/09-Congress/CC2009-14-Violations.htm

I doubt that's an exhaustive list of the USA's abuse of power.
I also doubt that I or anyone reading this will ever fall victim to anything of this sort.  Dark days are ahead, but the U.S. Constitution won't have anything to do with any of that.

I myself am the poster boy of social disconnect and laziness.  So it's not like I'm spearheading a campaign to knock down congress door and demand justice for every of one of the 100million+ human beings who were born in the USA.
However,
Freedom and Justice for all does not mean equality for all racial groups, or all religious groups.  It means freedom and justice for every man woman and child.  Yes, our gov't has never honored that, but if people had risen up and opposed slavery, genocide, et al, then George Washington, the First USA President, would not have gotten away with owning slaves *and* treating them horribly.  How many people showed up to lynch Andrew Jackson when he forced the Native American population out of the habitat that was already agreed upon by the U.S. gov't?  The few who did probably didn't make it to the nation's capital before getting lynched themselves by someone else...

The people that the USA is of by and for should feel empathy for the dead & wounded of this week's mass shooting.  But not because of the evil that caused it.  Not because of the death toll.  Individual deaths by handgun and other means total a lot more than 14 EVERY week.  Most of those deaths are committed by civilians toward civilians.  Few if any people can name even 14 of any given week.  Regionally the death toll may be lower, but how far away does someone need to be before demanding justice for them is considered too much of a burden?


I don't know of anything real recent that would be cause for waging war on the U.S. gov't except for the same old crap that we the people have been putting up with over the past 20+++ years...
And if you think Obama's administration is handling things better than the previous presidents' did, then let's just think about how bad things were when G.W. Bush was prez.  If it were found out that a president or former president had ordered a home invasion, wouldn't it be at least less surprising of Bush's name was mentioned?  You may think the world of Obama, he's certainly more subtle in his methods, I'll give him that, but his presidency is a temporary thing.  Clinton may succeed him, but how can you guarantee a Democrat for President after her time is up?

The USA will not resemble Stalin era Russia simply because one guy or gal is sworn in to office.  The constitution and the ideals its based upon are not something that any leader will predictably violate.  It starts in small pieces.  Those small pieces will not add up to anything significant until its too late to do anything about it.
We need guns.  We need grenades.  We shouldn't be without anything the military has.  Hopefully we'll never need to use them.  I don't suggest everybody in the nation go out and buy whatever assault weapon they can afford.  It beats the heck of out of me why background checks are deemed unnecessary for people that buy guns at a gun show -- if you + a gun is a liability, that does not change just because you're at a gun show.
Also, the no fly list is not due process.  If someone is a suspected terrorist, the US gov't should bring that someone(s) to court and charge them with whatever it is they suspect them with.  Disarming someone by putting them on a no-fly list w/o even any shred of due process is just dirty pool.