The Constitution has progressively become more and more of a problem as we have done things like decide it isn't cool to rape black women or view black people as property.... and then we decided that maybe women should be able to vote.... and maybe gay people shouldn't go to jail for being black... and the demographics of the country have changed. As a white man that is a product of the patriarchy it is easy to not consider the fact that over 3/4ths of the country are bound by a documents written by people that either passively of proactively excluded them from decision making and were not representative of them.
Did she just say she would do anything for her grandkids including shooting them to...protect them? WTF?
This should trigger some red flag laws depending on what state she's from...didn't waste too much time watching after that comment.
It doesn't require that most people agree to the change, it requires a super majority of people agree..... you need 2/3 in BOTH the House and Senate and 3/4. It is oppressive in operation
How is that not most people? I would say it is an effective control on wild swings at the whim of a bare majority. I guess the era of the progressives paying lip service to the Constitution and rule of law is over now, and we are moving on to pure idolization of a government completely unbound.
No, but we should definitely support the original intent of the Founders. On one hand, we should understand the environment they were in and not judge them too harshly, while on the other hand, we must try to reshape 21st century America into 18th century America as originally intended by the founders.
It is deceptive, "most people" would be 51%..... it is a super majority, in practice you are looking at needing 80% approval. It is effective at having people controlled by a documents drafted 250 years ago by all white men that supported oppression and did not and are not representative of the people. So 75% of the country gets to be rules by rules written by people that are like 25% of the population..... and were drafted 250 years ago. That is funny. What the hell do you think you have had since 9-11? With the extension of executive power. A government completely unbound? I guess you are new here...... Neither the Democrats or the Republicans have no respect for the Constitution, they both just look for any justification in the document to support their position and then pretend that their views are in line with the Constitution when the reality is it seldom is. If you want to pretend that your interpretation of the Constitution is the right one (which amazingly happens to align with your political beliefs) go ahead, but it is fool hardy and no different than the idiots that claimed masturbation was wrong because of a biblical reference or believed that human slavery is fine because the good book says so..... and to be clear, it isn't limited to Conservatives or Libertarians, they are some Liberals and Progressives that do the same.
You can have respect for the intelligence and achievements of the Founders, but that doesn't mean that they are representative of the people.... and as far as their "intent", do you mean enslave black people and not let women have equal votes? Because that is part of it..... at some point the time and cultural change is so severe that contemplating the intent of white men that have all been dead for 200 years isn't worth much. They are history, they were in some cases brilliant - but they are not infalliable Deities. What Rufus King or Jacob Broom felt about gun rights or transgender rights means close to nothing in 2022.
You realize we amended the Constitution to get rid of enslaving black people and to allow women to vote right?
Yes I am aware of that, I was a federal prosecutor and now have been in private practice as a lawyer for well over a decade. Those examples only prove my point. It took a Civil War to end the bondage of black people, and even then it was arguably only possible because the North defeated the South and the vote was help BEFORE the Southern states were returned to the Union. The Thirteenth Amendment never would have passed with freely elected legislators in the Southern states because the standard to get an amendment passed is so high. Hell, the Thirteenth Amendment even without the Southern states counting in the Union still didn't pass Congressional vote the first time. It took a Civil War, the nullification of of 11 of the 31 states and two votes just for black people to be taken out of bondage and given equal rights.... all because an antiquated document, that was written by and conventioned by all property owning white men. It wasn't representative of the people. Any mechanism that requires that type of herculean effort just to remove people from bondage isn't a successful mechanism. As for women getting the right to vote, am I to be impressed by an amendment process that did not allow women the bare minimum right to vote for over 125 years? Women did not have the guaranteed right to vote in the United States until 1920. It took over 70 years of CONSTANT physical altercations and protests for women to gain the right to vote even though they are 51 percent of the population. Hell the Amendment was introduced in the 1970's to Congress and SAT for nearly 50 years before the oppressively high standards to pass an amendment were met. That doesn't even account for discriminatory state voting laws that existed into the 1950's and 1960's. Why? All because the Constitution is not representative of America, it never was and it less so now than ever before. The argument of "well if you don't like the status quo pass an amendment" is such a loaded proposition and the claim "well the Constitution was amended to get rid of the enslavement of black people and allowed women to vote" is so devoid of context. It isn't something to be held up as a standard to show how wonderful the mechanics of the Constitution are - because it shows the opposite to be the case.
Most of the opposition to change is "I WANT THE RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES OF MY GRANDPA!!!! IF I DON'T HAVE THAT I AM BEING VIOLATED!!!! IF OTHER PEOPLE HAVE IT . . . I AM BEING VIOLATED" - White Men who are "constitutional purist" The don't care about "Being Fair" in any way form or fashion Rocket River
So, Crimocreepo guy's Dad signed off on two gun purchases allowing his son to buy the guns, including assault rifle, even though: 1.) The son was documented to be suicidal at one point. 2.) The son threatened to kill family members at one point. 3.) The son had all his of knife collection removed. Umm...Dad has some culpability here imo. What more warning signs do you need? Good luck in the civil suit.
I very much want to see the 2nd amendment done away with, I wish people would come to their senses but I don't know about getting rid of the constitution or the amendment process? I see criticisms, which are easy, I don't see suggestions for the new "better" system?
Just goes to show how worthless gun checks are.when biased parents can give the OK for their crazy kid should be able to purchase guns.
He threatened to kill everyone in Sept of 2019 and attempted suicide in April of 2019. What more do you need to establish basis? Umm...looks like we're going to have to remake the movie "Clear and Present Danger". Is Harrison Ford up for another? He can play CrimoCreepo's father.
