Alexander Hamilton and constitutional rights

Call me a geek, but I am really getting in to a book on CD about Alexander Hamilton.

Hey, it helped me pass a few hours on the road trip this weekend, so give me a break!

Anyway, I'm enjoying it because of the insights it's giving me on how our constitution was crafted by the founders.

But, what I'm having a little trouble comprehending--especially in light of yesterday's horrific events up in Blacksburg, Virginia--is why do we extend civil liberties to non-citizens?

I differentiate "liberties" from "rights." Rights are inalienable, as has been so appropriately pointed-out by the likes of Thomas Jefferson.

But, liberties are different.

For instance, if you're in this country legally or illegally but are not a citizen, I do NOT believe you have the constitutional RIGHT to bear arms. You are NOT a citizen, therefore you may enjoy whatever LIBERTIES we citizens choose to allow.

Clearly, after the Virginia Tech tragedy, Mr. Cho (a resident ALIEN) should not have been allowed to carry a gun.

Ah, well, back to the Hamiltonia . . .