Today, we see that justice is completely coopted by politics, a condition no republic can tolerate, but that is very apparent, even necessary, in a democracy. Is this why the leftists continue to insist that America is a "democracy?" It is not, but the United States is constantly referred to by senators and representatives as such.
A republic depends on the deliberation of competent individuals to write whatever laws are called for by the conditions of society, not at the whim of the mob. A democracy is, by definition, a mob demanding laws by popular whim, it is a very unruly and dangerous thing.
This is what America suffers from today. Popular television shows presented as "the news" stir up public outrage at some condition, true or not (most often untrue), but sensational and lending itself to irrational and emotional law-making. That impulse is supposed to be tempered by rational and deliberate individuals elected by those in their community and knowledgeable of their character and ability to be discerning.
Perhaps, when we had a less populous nation, a smaller nation (in size), that was possible, but then a representative was only initially supposed to represent 30,000 people (the size of a small city) (Art. I, Section 2, 3rd Clause), not the millions that they represent today, because the congress decided that they would cap the number of representatives in order to maintain the congress at the current size (435) under the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929.
Typically, when the Constitution is altered, it requires an amendment with all of its necessary encumbrances. In effect, this congressional sleight of hand meant that the federal government has instituted taxation without representation for the past 88 years (more than that actually, but at least that as a matter of law) against 680,000 people in every congressional district. This has led to all manner of gerrymandering and other political tricks to ensure that all of the people are not heard from and that those representatives are as unknown to the average person as a television star.
And yet, the people are called upon to make this decision on who should represent them. This is not possible. In a population of 30,000 it is likely that one might encounter their representative at some point, in some manner during the normal course of life, but not when one representative supposedly represents the interests of 710,000 people.
This lack of representation has led to the tendency of the government to function as a democracy rather than a republic, hence a great deal of our problems as a nation. The unconstitutional actions of the congress has led to a rash of denials of individual rights that, along with judicial rulings, combine to rewrite the Constitution along a populist bent without the formality that should accompany that act. It has restricted the "diversity" it was supposed to promote, by diluting the voices of smaller communities as they are lost among the larger population centers.
It was roughly this time in history (1910 to 1940) that so much of what America WAS was lost as Woodrow Wilson's vision of an effective and efficient federal government, regardless of legality, began to take hold and revolutionize politics.
If you combine this set of circumstances and abuses with the result of them, we find ourselves in the 21st Century with an absolutely corrupt and illegal government that cannot punish political criminals no matter how arrogantly and openly they commit their crimes. The people are unable to express their views in congress with the efficiency that was intended. And, when the government finds it expedient to abolish the Second Amendment with the practical efficiency that they chose to enact the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, it must be the moment that the people decide to "alter or abolish" it, because without the Second Amendment only the absolute destruction of the concept of a republic can be envisioned by those in congress. One might argue that without the Second Amendment it would have long since taken place.