Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Thank you for taking the time to try to explain it to me!

What I still don't get is the idea that the first ten amendments are 'foundational' to the USA. Surely it was the constitution itself which was 'foundational' and the amendments came along later as attempts to improve it?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

The "Bill of Rights" (first ten amendments) are foundational, for the reason that the Constitution was adopted on the promise of those amendments being immediately added.

The Amendments are not viewed as untouchable. We did once amend an amendment. The idea, though, is distasteful, because it implies that we made a mistake. The process to get an amendment is very difficult, remember.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

What like allowing rampant gun ownership? *runs from thread while ducking head*
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

But people do make mistakes.

There appears to be a kind of deification of the founding fathers, which is a wee bit scary.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Well, the first version of the Constitution passed was just the first seven articles which deal with the strucure of the government, how it should work. Basicaly this is who congress will be, how we will elect them, what they will do and how will they do it.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
After the surrender of the British at Yorktown, the war was basicaly over. People started to worry the new government would become abusive. They didn't think the original articles protected the people enough. So after much debate and bargining the "Bill of Rights" was ratified.
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
I believe a declaration of rights was not originaly included because they were more concerned with the British. The war was not going so well for us at the time. I do know some wanted it to be included from the get go but it never happened. These rights don't seem like such a big deal to people now but at the time they were quite radical. Not many places in the world at that time enjoyed this level of personal freedom. We are generaly taught that we were the first to be so free but that is rubbish.
I think of it this way. The Declaration of Indepenence, outlines why we were seperating and lists our greivances against the King. The original Constitution outlines what we are gonna do different. The Bill of Rights is how we are gonna keep the new government from becoming like the old one.
To me the foundation of our government is the Declaration of Independence. Especially the second paragraph wich could be thought of as the philisophical basis of our country. At least the intended one.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

So in essence, the Constitution was originally a stop-gap measure, with refinements always intended to be added once they had got the immediate business of winning independance out of the way?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Actually I'm rather fond of inept governments. Governments which are not inept seem to be really good at setting up concentration camps and silencing those who disagree with them. They do it will skill and the unshakable belief that they and only they, are right.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

No. The colonies were united as a single nation under Articles of Confederation in 1781, while we were still fighting the Revolutionary War. The War officially ended in 1783. A formal and official meeting was called in 1787 to revise the Articles of Confederation. The outcome of that meeting was the Constitution. It replaced the Articles in 1789.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I stand corrected.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

People make mistakes. It's life. Laws come and go. Societies change. Why is that distasteful?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

So you had Articles of Confederation, then the Constitution, then the Bill of Rights which made a bunch of amendments to the constitution. Then subsequent amendments as and when necessary.

I think I'm slowly getting the hang of this, but I'm still not clear as to why some amendments seem to be considered more important than others - unless it's simply a case of people liking some more than others, or considering some to be more important than others. And I don't see why amendments can't be amended again if that has happened in the past.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

The first ten amendments were done as a unit and were done when the drafters of the Constitution basically said "hey, we've said how the federal government works, but we haven't explicitly secured individual rights." They are considered the cornerstones of a free society in America--freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of peacable assembly, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom from cruel and unusual punishments, freedom to bear arms, etc.

The only other Constitutional Amendment that is held in that same light is the Fourteenth Amendment, enacted post-Civil-War, which made clear that states could not infringe on federally-protected rights and also established the equal protection clause (all citizens have equal protection under the law). The thirteenth amendment (which prohibited slavery) was passed at the same time, and they're often thought of as a unit.

Other constitutional amendments have important effects but the amendments themselves are not revered. This includes the sixteenth (federal government can collect income tax) and nineteenth (women's suffrage). The eighteenth amendment (prohibiting alcohol) is widely recognized as a mistake and was repeated by the 21st. Most of the remainder are just housekeeping matters and could be revised without outraging the general populace. But don't touch the Bill of Rights. Those are, in most American's eyes, the cornerstones of freedom.
 
So would I be correct in saying that it isn't a case of certain amendments being more important from a constitutional point of view, but rather that they are seen by the US public (and their elected representatives) as being of greater importance, and of being of greater historical significance, than other amendments, and other parts of the constitution?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Absolutely. The right to free speech is legally on the same level as term limits for the President...but they're night-and-day in terms of history and public perception. People would happily debate revising term limits, but if you attack the Bill of Rights, you'll be widely viewed as a tyrant moving in to put society in chains.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Has any part of the bill of rights ever been amended?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Yes, plus some parts just don't come up much in legal disputes. The 3rd Amendment, for example, has rarely ever been raised in a case.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

As far as I can tell, the second amendment simply gives US citizens the right to bear arms, and what exactly that means in practise has been established by legal process over the subsequent years. So theoretically, the legal interpretation could change in the future.

At present there are a wide variety rules regarding things like concealed-carry and open-carry, which vary from state to state but which presumably must all comply with the second amendment in as much as they don't interfere with the citizens' right to possess firearms.

Obviously when the amendment was enacted, firearms were a lot different than they are today, but the second amendment still applies to modern firearms.

OK, long preamble over. What I'd be interested to know is what our US friends would consider to be reasonable for the second amendment to allow them to possess nowadays. All types of firearm? Only firearms? Any military weaponry of any kind? Where would you draw the line, if at all?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I always found that strange, oathbreakers to a man yet held in such esteem.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

With this type of nonsense do you expect anyone to take you seriously? Wow. Absolute fail on every level. Well done.
 
Back
Top