Since even Supreme Court justices disagree on their interpretation, explaining the Bill of Rights to second and third graders is a tall order. Wise does pretty well, placing each provision -- e.g. the quartering of soldiers and the right to bear arms -- in some historical context, and using analogies from parent/child relationships to explain terms like ex post facto. One might still quibble with the explanation that free speech must be protected against the opposition of ""narrow minded people"" and the qualification that speech intended to ""injure the government"" may be an exception; ""narrow-minded people"" aren't the only ones who may be made uncomfortable by free speech, and it would have been worthwhile to make a distinction between ""the government"" and the men who happen to be in office at a given time. Otherwise, this is a responsible attempt -- and there has been far too little easy reading material on the Bill of Rights.