Is it <b>unconstitutional</b> to be put in the slammer for murder? How about being fined for speeding? I know it's illegal, but is it <b>unconstitutional</b>?
All of the vitriolic response to The Patriot Acts I and II. One of the chief criticisms is that it is unconstitutional. I wanted to know if that is a decimating criticism. It occurred to me that there are many common events in our life that are unconstitutional.
events perpetrated by the government? the constitution only restricts the government...it used to only restrict the federal govt..not it restricts state and federal.
We have federal penitentiaries. We have all kinds of federal crimes which probably don't specifically violate The Constitution, yet people get tossed in jail. I didn't mean events perpetrated by the government, I meant events perpetrated by people which end up compromising their liberty via encarceration. To wit: unconstitutional is not necessarily bad. It already exists and we cope with it.
in the constitution, congress is given law making authority...in article 2, judiciary power is given to the supreme court and lesser courts. congress has the power to make laws under the constitution...and the judiciary has the power to determine if you're violating those laws. the executive branch, under article 3, is then given the power to enforce those laws, establishing federal pens to lock up criminals, authorizing police force (FBI) to bring the bad guys in, etc. it's all constitutional.
The "perp" who commits the crime. All the squawking about The Patriot Act(s) being unconstitutional, as if it was the only thing unconstitutional in our life. It's not and that's my point... small, simple, large, whatever. I don't know for sure. It just occurred to me that there is much about our daily lives that could be deemed unconstitutional if we gave it it's head. I guess that's what Liberarianism is all about.
The Constitution is essentially a document which enumerates and proscribes certain federal powers. Since its inception, it has been amended so that the proscriptions against individual liberty also bind the states. The Constitution authorizes the various provisions that extend criminal liability for ordinary actions. You can challenge the Constitutionality of the law which extends criminal liability, but you have not engaged in anything "unconstitutional" in the criminal act itself. See?
There is a difference between crime and punishment under the reasonableness of the law and hiring mailmen to snoop through my bookshelves for terrorism manuals. Determining what is reasonable within the boundries of the law is what is most important. But, I harbor no illusions. I think it probably is like Gene Hackman's character said in Enemy of the State, that there are giant supercomputers under the Pentagon that capture our phone conversations and red flag them if they include certain words...and that was in 1970.
no...an individual actor cannot do something that is unconstitutional. there has to be some action on behalf of the state. when you commit a crime, you haven't violated the constitution...the constitution doesn't limit YOUR behavior...only the government's.
Yes, I understood that. Our absolute freedom is curtailed in many ways, (i.e. clothing is not optional, can't yell "fire", etc) yet we don't squawk about it. We adapt. The Patriot Act has a very specific and apparently necessary purpose but the critics here protest it unconstitutionality and the beginning of the end of our free nation. That seems silly. Note that my original question was not whether or not it was unconstitutional to murder somebody but whether or not it was unconstitutional to be put in the slammer for that murder. Isn't that we consider it not to be unconstitutional just adaptive?
no..not adaptive at all...it was NEVER unconstitutional to be locked up for committing a crime! the government was empowered to do that very thing underneath the constitution...of course you can't be locked up without the government proving its point...or having probable cause. the concerns about the Patriot Act are genuine...we have in the Bill of Rights some enumerated rights...things the government shall make no law abridging...certain rights are limited..but the extent to which they are limited is the question at hand.
