5 ms·
Maybe that's a feature and not a bug? I'd argue the point of having things in a constitution is because you expect them to be unpopular and they need to be embe
by version_five 4y ago
Maybe that's a feature and not a bug? I'd argue the point of having things in a constitution is because you expect them to be unpopular and they need to be embedded in the foundation of the country so they can't be changed. Otherwise why would you need a constitution?
- bediger4000 4y agoMy question is why go all the way on 2A, less than all the way on 1A, and shave 4A until it really doesn't have any impact? Also, 3A is utterly useless. It seems like a deliberate choice to limit free speech in some ways (libel and slander, fighting words, etc), make "reasonable search" into something very legalistic that the police can regularly lie about without consequence legal or otherwise, but let anybody carry any weapon any where. Why all in on one category, but not others?
- brodouevencode 4y agoThe Constitution can be changed with amendments, which require a convention and support from 2/3 of the states. That will never happen, the author knows this, so this is just a fluff piece designed to make like-minded people feel better about themselves. No wonder CNN's ratings are in the toilet.