Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 146
Thanks Tree55Thanks

Thread: The US constitution

  1. #1
    Junior Member Slartibartfast's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,660
    Thanks
    508

    From
    UK

    The US constitution

    Why hasn't the constitution been updated to keep up with social evolution?

    America of today is quite different to the 1700's but people keep reverting back to the constitution. The initial thought process behind the amendments at that time may have been relevant and ideal, maybe some still are. But certainly with the 2nd amendment, it hasn't kept in pace with technology.

    If you do what you've always done, you will get what you've always got.
    Thanks from Friday13

  2. #2
    New Member BigBob's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2018
    Posts
    426
    Thanks
    398

    From
    My house
    The second amendment is the most volatile for gun lovers and the NRA. Those people do not wish to have their "rights" impeded in anyway. When the constitution was written guns were a shot a minute and a militia was required by every county for security in the sense of police. Also in time of war they would be ready to fight any invader.
    Todays gun nuts have no desire to be a militia or even get into a gun fight. They are only bold when shooting animals in the wild from their blinds. The second has needed to be amended for years but every congressperson is scared of the NRA and gun nuts.
    Thanks from Slartibartfast and Friday13

  3. #3
    Shitposting Rank 4 Missle Command Champion johnflesh's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    21,551
    Thanks
    11790

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
    Why hasn't the constitution been updated to keep up with social evolution?

    America of today is quite different to the 1700's but people keep reverting back to the constitution. The initial thought process behind the amendments at that time may have been relevant and ideal, maybe some still are. But certainly with the 2nd amendment, it hasn't kept in pace with technology.

    If you do what you've always done, you will get what you've always got.
    I agree for the most part that a Constitution should have some built-in evolutionary function but to pin that to technology, social fads or justice, or any untested mechanism is folly and short sighted. That would dictate that private corporations and individuals could propose citizen's rights based on production.

    For instance the private sector/idea that will own the next global economy (which is evolutionary and dictated in private) will do so not by finding new energy sources, or widely accepted social values - it will be technology entirely. AI to be exact. We can't let that level and type of influence to effect our government, just like religion and special interest. We already speak about that, such as lobbying groups or identity politics. (Even though we don't want that type of influence, it always happens).

    That doesn't mean the Constitution can't be flexible enough among the people it protects to evolve when needed. Such as specifying the level of armaments a single individual needs.
    Last edited by johnflesh; 3rd March 2018 at 12:27 PM.
    Thanks from BigBob, Slartibartfast and Friday13

  4. #4
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    504

    From
    Barsoom
    The Constitution was not made to keep up with society. One of its purposes was to protect the country from human nature, which was based on several thousand of years of failures due to human nature. One of the purposes of the Second Amendment was a defense against tyranny, and taking guns is tyranny. Technology has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

  5. #5
    Veteran Member Dr.Knuckles's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    100,507
    Thanks
    8362

    From
    Vancouver
    Your 2nd amendment states in plain English the right to maintain a well regulated melitia.

    It says the word regulated.

    It says the word melitia.

    Using that as the basis to insist on a right of a person to carry a firearm to go shopping in public is simply not honest.

    Your courts disagree but itís just plain, basic English comprehension.

    Well. Regulated. Melitia.

    The argument is stupid. Itís blatantly dishonest.

  6. #6
    A Character Tennyson's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    2,266
    Thanks
    504

    From
    Barsoom
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr.Knuckles View Post
    Your 2nd amendment states in plain English the right to maintain a well regulated melitia.

    It says the word regulated.

    It says the word melitia.

    Using that as the basis to insist on a right of a person to carry a firearm to go shopping in public is simply not honest.

    Your courts disagree but itís just plain, basic English comprehension.

    Well. Regulated. Melitia.

    The argument is stupid. Itís blatantly dishonest.
    There is no "right to" in the Bill of Rights or the Second Amendment. A "right to" is a positive right, which is not an unalienable right. The Bill of Rights are unalienable rights.

    The Second Amendment does not mention a right in the prefatory clause. The word "right" is used in the operative clause.

  7. #7
    Junior Member Slartibartfast's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,660
    Thanks
    508

    From
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by Tennyson View Post
    The Constitution was not made to keep up with society. One of its purposes was to protect the country from human nature, which was based on several thousand of years of failures due to human nature. One of the purposes of the Second Amendment was a defense against tyranny, and taking guns is tyranny. Technology has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.
    How does anyone know because there is a process in place for amendments to take place.

    In my opinion, it was based on their history and current technology. They may have had good intentions at the time drafting it but the flaw was not revising it as society evolved.

    For example, if one had been written in the stone age days, would it be relevant in 1700? Assuming you feel you have the right to stone Mammoths to death.

  8. #8
    Junior Member Slartibartfast's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,660
    Thanks
    508

    From
    UK
    Take the 1215 Magna Carta that consisted of 63 rules. I would hazard a guess each one has been superseded by new laws as society evolved.

    Imagine if we stuck to 800 year old ideas.

  9. #9
    Member
    Joined
    Nov 2014
    Posts
    3,171
    Thanks
    701

    From
    Florida
    Quote Originally Posted by Slartibartfast View Post
    Why hasn't the constitution been updated to keep up with social evolution?

    America of today is quite different to the 1700's but people keep reverting back to the constitution. The initial thought process behind the amendments at that time may have been relevant and ideal, maybe some still are. But certainly with the 2nd amendment, it hasn't kept in pace with technology.

    If you do what you've always done, you will get what you've always got.
    There actually have been quite a few amendments. Try to keep up.

  10. #10
    Junior Member Slartibartfast's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    1,660
    Thanks
    508

    From
    UK
    Quote Originally Posted by Otto Throttle View Post
    There actually have been quite a few amendments. Try to keep up.
    Not the right ones by the looks of it. When are you going to get to grips with guns? 100 years or 1 million gun deaths, whichever is the soonest?
    Thanks from Claudius the God

Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Where in the Constitution??
    By Wrangler in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 120
    Last Post: 23rd May 2016, 02:47 PM
  2. The US Needs A New Constitution
    By TrueMan in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 9th September 2014, 06:51 AM
  3. Replies: 400
    Last Post: 27th March 2013, 06:02 PM
  4. what does the Constitution say?
    By nonsqtr in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 10th November 2009, 07:25 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed