All people have the right to safely own an Atomic Bomb

I respect your regard for the Constitution of the United States. However, the Constitution does not contain every right that a person has. In fact I do not care for the word "right", which is why I never used it in my argument. (Only in the title for the sake of succinctness.) A right is an odd fluffy term that doesn't amount to much when examined with scrutiny. That's why I prefer the term "freedom" and think of it as synonymous. Every person has self-evident freedoms. For example, if a person washes up on a deserted island we could say he has absolute freedom to do as he pleases on the island just as easily as we could say he has complete rights over the property. Have we elevated his position by calling them rights rather than freedoms? No. Anyway, the Constitution doesn't grant freedoms to individuals, it is only a document that binds those that swear to uphold it to not infringe upon specific freedoms of others, and was never intended to be an exhaustive list of freedoms as demonstrated by the 10th Amendment. "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Further, a man that that heavily influenced the Constitution was one called Thomas Jefferson, who in a letter to James Madison on Sep. 6, 1789 said "I set out on this ground which I suppose to be self evident, 'that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;' that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it." Thomas Jefferson was arguing that debts should not extend over the lifetime of the debtor; that children should not bear the debts of their forefathers. A fortiori, if a contract of debt is not binding, then how could the Constitution be binding to those who have not sworn to uphold it? It cannot. Furthermore, Thomas Jefferson was the one who wrote the Declaration of Independence which states: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..." Deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. So to recap: 1.) The Constitution does not state that it retains all freedoms not mentioned. 2.) Even if it did, the Constitution is not binding to citizens, only to those who swear to uphold it. 3.) Even if it was binding to citizens, they have the freedom declared under the declaration of Independence to withdraw their consent and govern themselves as they see fit. So the argument that people do not have the freedom to own a nuclear weapon because they don't have the "right" listed in the Constitution falls apart on three separate grounds. Now then, the next argument you propose is this: "Safe, civilian ownership of an atomic bomb does not exist." This would be a compelling argument and I would concede if it were at all true. All I have to do is give you one example of the safe release of atomic energy and there are 65 examples in the United States alone[1]. Yes these are nuclear reactors, not nuclear bombs, but the principle is the same; That the release of nuclear power can be safely contained. But if you are concerned about nuclear power falling into the wrong hands consider that the US government to date as done $1,768,093,374 worth of damages due to improper nuclear bomb testing and uranium handling[2]. Clearly we need to get nuclear power out of the hands of the psychotic people in government and hand it over to citizens in the private sector who not only do not cause enormous damage to innocents and nature, but actually produce 20% of the nations energy supply. Now to restate my position: All people have the freedom to safely own nuclear weapons and it is immoral for anyone to infringe upon that freedom. I think of "freedom" as synonymous to a "right", but the word "right" has become a mystical and confusing word. 1: http://www.eia.gov... 2: http://www.usdoj.gov...