Mayor Bloomberg: Interpretation of Constitution Will ‘Have to Change’

Actually, I don't think Franklin ever said that.

And even if he did....if you take it out to its logical conclusion it has us disbanding municipal police forces and eliminating speeding tickets.

Our liberties aren't limitless. Nor should they be. My liberty to own a nuclear weapon does not trump the greater good for safety of other human beings. My liberty to drive as fast as the car I can purchase will go does not trump the safety of the family of 4 driving beside me. The question is always, "Where do you draw the line?" But the idea that we are to never sacrifice liberty for safety is irrational and silly.

 

Car crashes happen thousands of times, every single day, all across America. Attacks like the one in Boston happen less than once a decade.

 

Got it. I'm not necessarily arguing for new laws/restrictions from Boston. Was engaging more on the discussion, generally.

These discussions are too often framed like gun control --- "I support gun control" vs. "I'm against gun control."

There are very few people I know who support gun control to the extent it means that all guns are to be confiscated and never sold again.

On the flip side, there are very few people I know (in fact I'm not sure of any) who would say that they oppose gun control and, thus, want no restrictions whatsoever on the purchase of any firearm you can possibly imagine. Ultimately, most people support at least some form of a background check, no matter how watered down.

Our rights aren't frozen in time...and the Constitution doesn't always willingly apply itself easily to a particular context. That's all I was getting at.

 

Really? What laws went into effect after Newtown? A boatload of little children gunned down in their own school....what reaction did we have? Their parents go to the Capitol to rally in support of change...and we can't even get new background checks on the books.

For events like this, there will always be reaction to deal with them and prevent them....but right now, there ain't a whole lot that really changes after these events.

I don't think we're any more reactionary than any other human beings on the planet...and I could argue that we're less reactionary than most.

 

There should be strong emotional reaction to people dying needlessly at the hands of others.

Reaction that matters is reaction that tries to find prevention going forward...otherwise, it's just talk. It's easy to talk. Easy to spout off in here or on Facebook. I don't really call that reactionary...I call it talking big while killing time.

 

Yes he did. Here is the actual source:

http://franklinpapers.org/franklin/framedVolumes.jsp?vol=6&page=238a


Most of it was about not wanting to paying taxes, but some of it applies directly to current government:

If you wanted to substitute muslim for natives the letter is more relavent.

 

Thanks Air Langhi....thought I had read before that the quote wasn't really his.

Doesn't change my thoughts on it though..particularly the way it's thrown around in this context today.

 

This is a big problem in this country today. Everything is binary - for or against. There is no middle ground. You are either for all guns or no guns. On most issues, there are a zillion points on the continuum where people can fall. However, the discourse of the day allows for none of them.

 

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-april-24-2013/weak-constitution?xrs=share_copy