Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually I take that part about not being able to monitor or regulate it back. There is a way. Before a justice can render a decision, they must use all the supporting evidence available to prove that their decision is agreable with the original intent of the founders. If I'm not mistaken, this is how it is done today, correct?
True...... but then, how are there 9 different opinions.
Some totally opposite the others. You sit back and go... How does that opinion preserve liberty & freedom? That is tyranny, for some in the name of the collective. Forget INDIVIDUAL freedom.
Lately there have been many 5/4 votes.
That is a false statement, you have the right to bare arms, that is granted to you by the Constitution for being in it to begin with.
The US Constitution does not chain the people. It chains the centralized federal government.
All free people, are endowed with self protection from all forms of oppression.
The Constitution doesn't give the people that right. It states that the government has no right to even attempt to cross that line. PERIOD!
We just fought a brutal bloody war, using our own weapons, we the people owned.
Written very straight forward, right after fighting a blood war over tyranny and oppression.
Individual freedom as outlined in the bill of rights has been compromised. Not because We The People let it happen, but because We The People directed it to happen.
No amendment. Just feel good law and alphabet agencies mandating we no longer have that freedom.
Not every unconstitutional law is challenged to the courts.
The problem is that as soon as it was written and passed, people started interpreting for their own means. And each subsequent group of people point to the previous group and said "they set the precedent." Which is true. So you have about 225 years of precedent nobody wants to give up. Conservatives are gonna give it up, liberals aren't gonna give it up, and independents aren't gonna give it up.
The problem is that as soon as it was written and passed, people started interpreting for their own means. And each subsequent group of people point to the previous group and said "they set the precedent." Which is true. So you have about 225 years of precedent nobody wants to give up. Conservatives are gonna give it up, liberals aren't gonna give it up, and independents aren't gonna give it up.
The winners is the Lawyers, to push some abstract view of the US Constitution! Sad!
That is a false statement, you have the right to bare arms, that is granted to you by the Constitution for being in it to begin with.
Something to remember Urban, is that the Constitution is not the governments permission slip to the people, the government does not "grant" us or "give" us any Rights through the Constitution, rather, it is We The People, who "give" authority to and allow the government to exist through the Constitution.
You are wrong according to the framers as well. The Rights they set forth in the Bill of Rights, as they believed, existed without a Bill of Rights. Some of the framers didn't even want a Bill of Rights in the Constitution. James Madison for one, didn't think we needed a BoR because he believed the Constitution spelled out what the government could and could not do, and if it wasn't mentioned, then it was none of governments business. Others didn't want a BoR because they feared that if some Rights were included, others not explicitly listed would be left vulnerable. Some, like Thomas Jefferson, felt that the Constitution must guarantee { not give } certain Rights that no government could infringe upon.
The US Constitution does not chain the people. It chains the centralized federal government.
All free people, are endowed with self protection from all forms of oppression.
The Constitution doesn't give the people that right. It states that the government has no right to even attempt to cross that line. PERIOD!
We just fought a brutal bloody war, using our own weapons, we the people owned.
Who said it chained anyone? Though when it was written it basically still chained women and blacks. The Constitution grants rights, including fundamental rights.
Something to remember Urban, is that the Constitution is not the governments permission slip to the people, the government does not "grant" us or "give" us any Rights through the Constitution, rather, it is We The People, who "give" authority to and allow the government to exist through the Constitution.
You are wrong according to the framers as well. The Rights they set forth in the Bill of Rights, as they believed, existed without a Bill of Rights. Some of the framers didn't even want a Bill of Rights in the Constitution. James Madison for one, didn't think we needed a BoR because he believed the Constitution spelled out what the government could and could not do, and if it wasn't mentioned, then it was none of governments business. Others didn't want a BoR because they feared that if some Rights were included, others not explicitly listed would be left vulnerable. Some, like Thomas Jefferson, felt that the Constitution must guarantee { not give } certain Rights that no government could infringe upon.
I never said the government grants us these rights, I said the Constitution grants us these rights, figured that would be easy for you guys to understand.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.