Mike Nobody wrote:
GLENNY J wrote:POSTED 12 20 12 under gun haters page 6
Yeah, I'm saying it like it is, you guys are seriously f**k up in the head. Who gives a sh1t what the founding fathers think..? they framed the laws knowing that times would change, which is exactly why congress has the ability to make and change laws. The constitution is severely outdated, and I personally would vote yes to a new one. We're one of the few countries in the world without a modern constitution, and also one of the few who have never re-written one to keep up with the times. We're obviously too stupid to believe any other country can do anything better than us, so we refuse to learn from anyone, and keep making the same stubborn and dumb mistakes.
Don't get a BB gun Kramer,,,,,, You'll shot your eye out!
I don't get why he thinks a new constitution would be an improvement over the one we've got.
It is DESIGNED to change with the times.
It is SUPPOSED to be adaptable to changes in society.
But, it is also VERY HARD to make any changes.
Which is a good thing.
Otherwise, every dumb idea that comes along would be in there, like prohibition was.
I mean, what the Hell does he WANT?
What is in another constitution that he wants in ours?
If he wants it that bad, start lobbying congressmen.
Mike, I merely suggest rewriting it only to bring the language up to date, as well as more clearly define the balance of power- as it's obvious that the balance has been circumvented with the current rules- The SCOTUS is clearly corrupt, the POTUS has no executive hurdles anymore, and congress can't get anything done because of fillibusters and infighting.
Many of the original 10 amendments have been turned on their heads and defined to mean exactly the opposite of their intention because of "loose interpretation", and the sick part is that everyone knows it, and is apathetic to it. Our entire government has been corrupted by money and powerful lobbies. We need to update the balance of power to circumvent that vacuum as well as redefine the power of the constitution.
Have you noticed that currently almost half of the first 10 amendments (aka bill of rights) have been violated by executive orders or "acts" like the patriot act? A new constitution needs to clearly spell out that amendments cannot be overwritten by one executive, or a single act.
The problem is that they built it to grow based on what they knew then. Do you think they would have written it the same way today, if they saw what we see? We all know they wouldn't have. There were things that were predictable, and things that were not. I'm arguing that the things that were not have overcome the spirit of the document, and have rendered it mostly a joke.
If you don't think so, go read the bill of rights and think about how many amendments are today clearly violated by legislative efforts, only to be upheld by the supreme court.
You're preaching to the choir about the unconstitutionality of our government.
They are disregarding the constitution, blatantly.
Changing it or replacing it won't change that.
Writing a law to "obey the law" is kinda redundant.
Nixon must be spinning in his grave.
At this point, only a mass revolt would change the direction of our corrupted system.
I don't mean anything dumb like overthrowing the government.
I mean people must strike, refuse to work for the system until it changes.
The occupy Wall Street movement is a good start.
But, it needs to grow.
Of course the Founding Fathers would have done things a little differently today.
Like that 3/5ths of a human being thing, for starters.
But, really, for what flaws they had, they wrote a brilliant document for its time.