-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Constitutional Convention - What to put in it?
- Thread starter Fx51LP308
- Start date
I think that in America today there is zero chance chance of a consutitional convention improving on the consutition bestowed us by the founders. I think there is a 99.9997% chance that any such convention would install a new permanent ruling class. In short we would be fucked.
None, as long as they do not effect the rights/wellness of others. Children out of wedlock, are profoundly effected their whole lives in ways most can't, nor ever will. grasp.
By then, it's way too late. The damage/bloodshed is done. And the scorn of everyone condemning the act(s) of violence will be all that's left, combined with the grief of the victims' families. If the violence can be prevented beforehand, it should be. Just make sure the person is, in fact, a credible threat to themselves or others.
So yes I agree children out of wedlock is not a good idea.
It has also been a problem all throughout history.
Children need to have a father figure in their lives to help raise them and help them mature correctly.
I probably have more immediate experience with this and understanding of the complexity and effects than many others.
The cause of having children out of wedlock is having sexual relations outside of marriage.
So should that then be punished the same way since that is the root cause of children outside of marriage?
The other issue is that lots of children are born "in wedlock" but then essentially are the same as if they were born "out of wedlock" because the mother promptly decides to divorce the father and take the kid (all with the help of the government) and refuse to let the father have his rights to the child (which the government usually does nothing about) and essentially the poor kid is in the same boat with extra baggage of the mother always saying bad things about the father to the kid and using the kid as a checkbook for their lifestyles.
This was a problem all the way back in the times of Moses and they had a fairly straightforward plan.
A. Get young people married off once they started being interested in sex before they could start playing the fool / whore etc.
B. The entire family clan was responsible for keeping your young women and men chaste, as well as finding them a husband/wife in short order.
C. If someone had sex outside of marriage, pretty much it was sword and spear point wedding and you then best work hard to support your family.
To give you an idea for more modern times, Our Church has very strong moral rules on having sex outside of a proper marriage according to God's law. Which of course would ideally solve the problem of children out of wedlock.
But human nature and human physical desires are what they are, and sometimes people fall short of what they should do.
In the event a woman turns up pregnant unmarried and was impregnated by an unmarried man, it's a big deal, yet the proper doctrine is to treat them with compassion and concern as Jesus Christ would and did do and help them repent and council them on how to make the best out of the situation and move forward, but the choice is always in the end up to them. The 2 parties marrying being the obvious best choice, but there are other options such as adoption or (much less good), raising the child alone with the support of the family and the local congregation & hoping for a marriage later on when a good man is found.
Children out of wedlock is a big thing right now BECAUSE of the Government.
The government subsidizes unwed mothers who are "poor" but... only if they stay single and unwed.
The government makes "child support payments" the sure, easy, foolproof ticket some harlot can entrap men to be wage slaves for decades.
The government all but advocates women divorce their husbands and live the life of no responsibility and who cares about the fathers being able to see their kids or help raise them?
Then let's not forget the problems with propaganda about "women's liberation" telling them they don't need men and should just raise a generation of hellions by themselves (after aborting a bunch of course).
And who will determine if it is a crazy person or just some troll on the internet? The criteria need to be 100%. Interpretation is why we have the NFA and all of the other BS gun laws. It truly is that simple...... no crime, have a gun.
If you want to stop people from committing a crime, address the problem. If it is mental illness, address that. If it is being a dumbass, address that.
The courts will.... based on input from the mental health authorities. That's why I say someone "adjudicated" mentally ill.
Good luck getting that to work in both of our lifetimes....
This country has always done a very poor job across the board, when it comes to mental illness. Mental illness is now main stream & gathering steam in this country. The fact the news leads with who is fucking who, plus photos of tits & ass is a clue that we are never going back to a semi moral country.
I have as much faith in the courts as I do in the politicians in this country. And again, it is up to interpretation, which is complete shit. What you are saying is that you want Red Flag laws. So if a person has a "mental illness" that is classified in the DSM-5, a judge can work with a "professional" in the mental health field and take your guns away........ So if people think you are an asshole and you have sleep apnea, we can take your guns away. Sound about right?
AS for fixing mental illness in the US, it is not as hard. Enabling people for one.
We did not have as big of a problem with it 50 years ago........ and we also did not have the issue of homeless camps all over the place. Wonder what changed?.........
Not "Red flag." But more like "Baker Act" here in FL, or "5150" in Calif. In this way, the person (not the property) is removed from the house, for however long it takes to evaluate them. Once cleared, they can return to their house and their property. And, in this case, the defense has the ability to be present at the hearing and argue the case for their client. Unlike Red Flag laws where the initial contact with the judge before the sanction is imposed is "ex parte."
Nope. Again, there must be a formal hearing where the defense gets to argue on behalf of the subject. In this case, the defense atty can force the prosecutor to prove his client is an asshole and has sleep apnea. Or, at least, make it clear that sleep apnea and being an asshole are not themselves just cause to adjudicate someone mentally ill. Now, if by being an asshole, they mean s/he brandishes weapons all about and threatening people with them, then yes, that's worthy of an adjudication. BTW, FWIW, I'm not an asshole, but I do have sleep apnea...
And which one of you bright dipshits have decided its a good time to have a constitutional convention?
You fuckig people are nuttier than squirrel shit.
THIS WONT FIX IT!
THEY ARENT EVEN READING OR BELIEVING THE DOCUMENT THAT ALREADY EXISTS!
Stupid motherfuckers.
You fuckig people are nuttier than squirrel shit.
THIS WONT FIX IT!
THEY ARENT EVEN READING OR BELIEVING THE DOCUMENT THAT ALREADY EXISTS!
Stupid motherfuckers.
Repeal 16th, 17th, 19th, 23rd amendments.
Modify the 22nd to include term limits straight across the board and to limit years in any public sector job to 20 max.
A 28th Amendment that would not allow Congress to make any laws that apply to American citizens that don’t apply equally to the members of Congress effective, and retroactive, the day the amendment is ratified.
Delete the congressional lawsuit slush fund.
Election day is a National Holiday and only votes cast (after showing an ID) on that day be counted with very few specific exceptions.
Prohibit use of social security funds for any purpose other than to pay those who have actually paid into it.
Build the fucking southern border wall and use federal troops to guard it...DMZ? I'd consider a northern border wall, too, just because.
End all foreign aid except maybe a hospital ship in times of disaster.
Dismantle and abandon all bases not on US soil with just a few exceptions such as Diego Garcia, South Pole...
Modify the 22nd to include term limits straight across the board and to limit years in any public sector job to 20 max.
A 28th Amendment that would not allow Congress to make any laws that apply to American citizens that don’t apply equally to the members of Congress effective, and retroactive, the day the amendment is ratified.
Delete the congressional lawsuit slush fund.
Election day is a National Holiday and only votes cast (after showing an ID) on that day be counted with very few specific exceptions.
Prohibit use of social security funds for any purpose other than to pay those who have actually paid into it.
Build the fucking southern border wall and use federal troops to guard it...DMZ? I'd consider a northern border wall, too, just because.
End all foreign aid except maybe a hospital ship in times of disaster.
Dismantle and abandon all bases not on US soil with just a few exceptions such as Diego Garcia, South Pole...
Remember that there was actually special Education with a SpEd teacher and separate rooms for those with sever learning disabilities? Yeah, those are gone. Now teachers are expected to teach to the lowest and slowest while hoping that the brightest do not get too bored. NCLB holds the entire herd back..the wolves can feed a little deeper into the healthy.We did not have as big of a problem with it 50 years ago........ and we also did not have the issue of homeless camps all over the place. Wonder what changed?.........
Remember that there were once residential facilities for people with all sorts of mental disorders? Those have largely been closed down. I'd guess that most of the homeless are in their situation from self inflicted cause but there are certainly those that are truly unable to care for themselves. Eliminating handouts would go a long way to getting many of the able off of the streets.
The plan, was implemented?We did not have as big of a problem with it 50 years ago........ and we also did not have the issue of homeless camps all over the place. Wonder what changed?.........
No but within a generation with quality blocks of instruction, they won't have to be taught as hard!
I disappoint many all the time, nothing new. Different roads traveled, teach as well as form lasting opinions.
should this happen? hard to know. not happening for a variety of reasons. my .02 but somehow to strengthen or enforce the 10th. a pipe dream but if that could happen,as it should,about 90% of fed gov,agencies,bureaucracies could be shut down and their employees put out on the street. LOL.
I don’t really think of mil as “gov employees” but I guess you’re technically correct. I’ll amend my statement to civilian federal employees.
You have a point there. Like shooting a rifle that patterns 2 MOA. Shooting it more will not reduce the dispersion size.
Also, Einstein's definition of insanity. Repeating the same behavior (expecting others to read and implement it) and expecting a different result (reading and implementing it) when it has not been done before.
When we make a law about something, what we're really saying is that we are threatening others with violence to get our own way.
We don't get a moral and just society by passing more laws, we do it by establishing systems that allow us to operate with fewer laws.
Chances are 2/3 won't be using oxygen eventually.
The Global Elites crow about wanting even less useful serfs to survive.
I'm all in on population reduction, just not the way they want to do it,... Now if we can chose who gets eliminated, more better.
Doubt that, as population control can be achieved in more than one way w/o killing. Not as fast as NWO would like though,...
excellent rundown of examples of "good" people's seeking gov action. to me,odd coming from a professed christian. i consider religion the 1st form of fascism in human society. the abrahamic monotheisms are the worst by far. buddhism and hinduism have had the same problems. the desire of all religions seems to be the willingness to co-opt the secular gov to use it's lethal force to apply it's tenants to the population. i always want to believe that the 1st amendment means freedom of religion and freedom from religion. in a democratic system,people are free to vote their conscience or beliefs. using lethal force to force people to do what "god" wants has been the problem for centuries. if the legal system just focused on protecting life,liberty and property from force and fraud and determining guilt or innocence and not letting the system play silly word games we would all be better off. police could then be used to protect and serve,not harass and abuse.
and yes,suppressing religion(s) is a bad idea. it is unjust and potentially abusive of the right to free thought and expression. worse it gets people used to the idea of government using it's lethal power to censor,suppress and punish any speech or thought the elites don't want to hear.
i must confess that my thinking about religious freedom is changing when it comes to islam. it seems that it's recently imported practitioners believe that rape,assault and murder are OK with allah. the koran seems to OK lying,taxing,killing and enslaving non believers. that is a problem which is playing out a lot of places.
You are seeing the puppets and not the ones pulling the strings.
In Europe how long does the average white skinned, native born citizen last if they start raping, rioting, talking against the government, assaulting etc?
Not long, the police are out in full force to put the boots to them hard.
But apparently a darker skinned "immigrant" can get away with all that and do it in big groups and the police are all hands off...
Not only that but you'll notice the police will actually go protect the criminal "immigrants" from any "local natives" trying to defend themselves and now in England and Denmark and other places going even so far as to harshly punish any white skinned native citizens that happen to tell the truth about the crime statistics of how much of the rapes, assaults and such are done by "immigrants".
Why is this happening?
It is being done all on a plan to brutalize, cower and then eliminate and replace the local native population.
The "immigrants" who are being sent to all those countries in Europe (just like in the USA) are NOT the "good folks" but are rather criminals, and other low lifes and unstable characters and then they are given lots of money, hopped up on hate and given a free hand to do crimes.
If they were being dealt with like the rest of the native population, they would either be behaving or would be in prison or deported.
Kinda curious how you propose doing so in the framework of any major religion.
Morals aside, I'm unfamiliar with any tribe or nation that has ever succeeded by voluntarily reducing its birthrate.
Human life is so rare that we can't afford to recklessly throw it away under misguided notions of resource scarcity. The pie isn't fixed in size, and cutting it into fewer larger pieces isn't the path to prosperity. Finding new ways to productively deploy as many resources as possible has always been the path to success for the human race.
They could. But why would the people
Elected by ghettos give up that control?
The electoral college was created specifically to prevent urban areas from controlling rural areas.
And that’s exactly what is happening in states across the country. And why they are busing in shit bags to red rural states that a handful of acres can control millions of square miles.
There are very few things (like a said a FEW) wrong in the current constitution. Its the people who are the problem.
Our Politicians, Our people.
We want everything handed to us.
After any natural disaster, occurance, etc. "What will the govts [state,local,federal] responses be?"
NO one asks "What can I do to help or be better prepared" The only reason for govt to exist is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
That's not really working out for us right now as election season is "What bribe can I offer the masses for their vote"
150 years ago there was no backup. You had your homestead, no failure net, and every opportunity in the world. Now we have all these failure nets, and very little opportunity.
Our Politicians, Our people.
We want everything handed to us.
After any natural disaster, occurance, etc. "What will the govts [state,local,federal] responses be?"
NO one asks "What can I do to help or be better prepared" The only reason for govt to exist is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.
That's not really working out for us right now as election season is "What bribe can I offer the masses for their vote"
150 years ago there was no backup. You had your homestead, no failure net, and every opportunity in the world. Now we have all these failure nets, and very little opportunity.
Interesting question and going to follow future comments.
Admittedly- I didn't read all of the previous posts so forgive me if this has already been repeated but here's my 2 cents regardless.
At the end of the day, the Constitution is a piece of paper (to nitpick myself, I think it actually was written on leather if I remember correctly) that was written by people that endured tremendous personal persecution for having putting "pen to paper" as the expression goes and I'm not going to nitpick the world they existed in being vastly different from our world- frankly I think that's part of the brilliance the founding fathers left us with, a 'living' document that could grow with our country but still made a steadfast claim in the Bill of Rights of what the foundation of the "American Experiment" should be.
I can't help but recall my history education and how the Constitution was married with the Revolutionary War. I also remember there being a 'round two' in 1812. There was also a pretty "interesting" time in our history between 1861-1865 while different states were 'exploring' I'll say, idea of constitutional 'rights'. We also had a couple of decades afterwards where we chose to expand that belief westward and share that with our Mexican & Spanish neighbors. Of course that ultimately led us to an "exciting" period between 1917-1918 to end all of the perceived 'nonsense' once and for all and frankly we did pretty good collectively in our participation in that one.
The world continued to change (don't worry, we still had our beloved constitution although that probably wouldn't offer too much comfort to our Japanese citizens for the next chapter...) So about 30 years later, we had the sequel for what was supposed to be the final chapter and this one took 4x as long and just as much if not more of a toll for the "War to End All Wars Redux" (1940's edition).
We suspended Habeas Corpus before during the 1860's, later decided in the courts during the suspension of their 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, & 8th "rights" guaranteed by the US Constitution to the Japanese Americans was constituently acceptable (because... lawyers right?) so we ran out of moral ground and then started shooting & bombing the Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, (let's throw Grenada, Honduras, etc into the mix) the Afghani's, the Iraqi's (x2) and I'm all but certain there's just as many that I missed in my comment.
Long story short- my point is, the Constitution is an important document but only as good as the ink it's written with when it starts to either become a "guideline" or a piece of paper that may or may not be enforced whenever convenient by our elected officials charged with ensuring its enforcement.
Once we stop caring about it being enforced (consistently), which I fear is where we're at, I hate to be the one to say this but at that point- what does it matter what the document states or was amended to if the people governed by it don't care and the electorates who are tasked with enforcing it aren't held accountable?
-LD
Admittedly- I didn't read all of the previous posts so forgive me if this has already been repeated but here's my 2 cents regardless.
At the end of the day, the Constitution is a piece of paper (to nitpick myself, I think it actually was written on leather if I remember correctly) that was written by people that endured tremendous personal persecution for having putting "pen to paper" as the expression goes and I'm not going to nitpick the world they existed in being vastly different from our world- frankly I think that's part of the brilliance the founding fathers left us with, a 'living' document that could grow with our country but still made a steadfast claim in the Bill of Rights of what the foundation of the "American Experiment" should be.
I can't help but recall my history education and how the Constitution was married with the Revolutionary War. I also remember there being a 'round two' in 1812. There was also a pretty "interesting" time in our history between 1861-1865 while different states were 'exploring' I'll say, idea of constitutional 'rights'. We also had a couple of decades afterwards where we chose to expand that belief westward and share that with our Mexican & Spanish neighbors. Of course that ultimately led us to an "exciting" period between 1917-1918 to end all of the perceived 'nonsense' once and for all and frankly we did pretty good collectively in our participation in that one.
The world continued to change (don't worry, we still had our beloved constitution although that probably wouldn't offer too much comfort to our Japanese citizens for the next chapter...) So about 30 years later, we had the sequel for what was supposed to be the final chapter and this one took 4x as long and just as much if not more of a toll for the "War to End All Wars Redux" (1940's edition).
We suspended Habeas Corpus before during the 1860's, later decided in the courts during the suspension of their 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, & 8th "rights" guaranteed by the US Constitution to the Japanese Americans was constituently acceptable (because... lawyers right?) so we ran out of moral ground and then started shooting & bombing the Koreans, Chinese, Vietnamese, (let's throw Grenada, Honduras, etc into the mix) the Afghani's, the Iraqi's (x2) and I'm all but certain there's just as many that I missed in my comment.
Long story short- my point is, the Constitution is an important document but only as good as the ink it's written with when it starts to either become a "guideline" or a piece of paper that may or may not be enforced whenever convenient by our elected officials charged with ensuring its enforcement.
Once we stop caring about it being enforced (consistently), which I fear is where we're at, I hate to be the one to say this but at that point- what does it matter what the document states or was amended to if the people governed by it don't care and the electorates who are tasked with enforcing it aren't held accountable?
-LD
I agree. It's pretty clear that the "Constitution" is only as good as "We the People" being willing to understand and enforce its original intent. Part of that enforcement being, to ensure that all of "We the People" know and understand what that original intent was, and is today. The problem being, a lot of people today want to "mis-interpret" that original intent (i.e. "fluid/living/breathing document") in order to facilitate their own current political agendas. My intent in altering the Constitution with new amendments would be only to make that original intent perfectly clear, so that it no longer can be subject to "alternate interpretations." Yes, I still agree that we need to enforce it, and the success of our society is dependent upon our ability to enforce that original intent. But, at least, we made that intent "perfectly clear" on paper (or, 'in stone", as it were). Given the level of "mis-interpretation" going on these days in the legislature and the courts, I don't think it's all that clear. We need to get that "clarity" on the record.
Wasn't trying to give you any crap either- lord knows the Pit has enough people with nothing better to do than live out their tough guy fantasies despite being overweight folks that are... over the hill age-wise at least. Good post & question though OP. Looking forward to further opinions being shared.
-LD
So Minority Report? How is that a good thing?
Anyone can have bad thoughts to do bad things. When does that become disqualifying? Only when someone does the action. The action is the only part that should be legislated against. All other times defensive responses protect.
My thoughts carrying for example to a movie theater. Something bad happens. Circumstances align (family is safe, etc.) and I decide to intervene. I may not be able to stop bad guy from killing in the first 20 seconds or 4 people. I may be able to save the next 20+.
Or threatens to do it. Or exhibits furtive behaviors/movements as if they are going to do it. Similar to most DGU laws where the victims must be in "reasonable imminent fear of death or great bodily harm." If they keep those "bad thoughts" to themselves, then, yes, that's not "disqualifying." But the moment they let others know that's what they're thinking, or demonstrate any form of carelessness with weapons, it becomes an issue.
Concealed or OC? Just curious...
If you were, physically, unable to engage the BG until after those first 4 people were taken, then so be it. You did your due diligence to ensure the safety of your family, etc. But if you could have engaged and stop the BG from even firing once (i.e. by GGWG confronting the BGWG) and you didn't, that's a problem. If the BG was simply threatening people and not firing and you engaged them, causing them to stand down, that's a good thing.
Point being, yes, people might think bad thoughts. But as long as they keep them to themselves and don't exhibit any behaviors that might indicate what they're thinking, then that person doesn't deserve to be "disqualified." The moment they make those thoughts public or behave in a furtive way, then action should be taken against them.
Most of the time these days for movie theater since most have stupid signs, m&p9c gen 1 in alien gear ankle holster. Not in right shape for IWB comptac minotaur. Otherwise I carry it in a safariland 7378. That is either cc or oc.
Your second to last paragraph I mostly agree with. The thinking with the 4 is to try to stave off second guessing after the fact. The whole what if loop. Different situations would require different responses. Hopefully everyone goes home safe except maybe the perp if situation warrants it.
Sorry for derail. Back to subject.
Similar threads
