4 ms·

Amending hasn’t really cut it though, has it? I’m convinced we need a page 1 rewrite. Assumptions don’t age well (earth is flat and the center of the universe,

Amending hasn’t really cut it though, has it? I’m convinced we need a page 1 rewrite. Assumptions don’t age well (earth is flat and the center of the universe, diseases are caused by the humors, a weapon only marginally increases the harm a human can do, etc etc). All laws (the constitution included) are created upon assumptions and they should go through a controlled burn once in a while or else we get end-of-empire wildfires. I’m also wondering what good to see in an armed citizenry being “not shabby” - and before you say something to the effect that it “keeps our government in line” try to remember they have stratospheric death robots that think your ar-15 is just adorable.

nverno 3y ago
Which assumptions from the constitution do you think need to be rewritten? They seem to have aged astonishingly well to me, although I think they should be extended in many cases, eg. limiting government ability to mess with encrypted communications. Rewritting them in this day and age would surely limit our rights further.
- pksebben 3y ago
  Article 1 Section 1 is a good place to start. The system of checks and balances and the concept for the structure and format of representative government has proven itself incapable of being effective in the modern era. We get nothing done, and what we do get done is exclusively to the benefit of those that can afford to finance campaigns. Our legislative branch is an absolute joke (life terms, like, really?) and the whole idea behind the senate is meaningless in a world where we can fly from one end of the country to the other in a day, and have instantaneous communication. Our systems of voting are similarly backwards, designed in a time when you had to send a dude on a horse to communicate. Seriously, page 1 rewrite. The whole damn thing.
flagrant_taco 3y ago
What would you like to see added or removed from the constitution? Personally I'd love an amendment declaring our right to privacy, though we really just need to better enforce illegal search and seizure. > I’m also wondering what good to see in an armed citizenry being “not shabby” - and before you say something to the effect that it “keeps our government in line” try to remember they have stratospheric death robots that think your ar-15 is just adorable. So are you saying we shouldn't have the right to arm ourselves because we're already so outmatched by our own government? And to clarify here, the goal of an armed citizenry and armed militias was extremely important when we didn't have a standing military. The original goal was much less about actually making sure citizens come uld overthrow their own government, that's a modern view usually held by those who don't realize how terrible a civil war would actually be. I'm of the opinion that we should get rid of this farce that we must have a permanent, massive standing army rather than attempting to disarm all our citizens. Our military needs something to do as long as it's there, we're always going to be looking for a fight to prove why they exist.
- solidsnack9000 3y ago
  > ...the goal of an armed citizenry and armed militias was extremely important when we didn't have a standing military. The original goal was much less about actually making sure citizens come uld overthrow their own government, that's a modern view usually held by those who don't realize how terrible a civil war would actually be. Yes, this is something more 2nd Amendment advocates should learn about. The militia was instituted for the common defence and was characteristic of the "...organic union of society and government..." that Huntington attributes to many of the late medieval institutions which contributed to the decentralised, self-balancing system of public policy which the founders inherited from the English. https://rentry.co/72dov https://rentry.co/72dov
  - flagrant_taco 3y ago
    In very layman's terms, I've long viewed the original design as the wanting a educated, trained, and armed citizenry that could actually be trusted to act like adults. If needed they could form militias or even organized armies, but the default state is a nation of adults largely just living out their lives with as few government interventions as possible. We've since destroyed that goal. Our education system is trash, we don't train our citizens how to take care of or defend themselves, and the gun debate has largely devolved into "no one should have guns because we have cops and armies for that" versus "I have a right to bear arms so I can keep this oppressive government in check"
- pksebben 3y ago
  See, I'm a little on the other side of this. I believe in compulsory service. It's not that I think the military is all that (it isn't, source: did it myself), it's just that if we're gonna let people have weapons, it is a Good Idea to train them on how to respect them properly. It's hard to take these gun nut militias seriously when all their videos have them doing dumbass shit like barrel flagging and handling them loaded when they're just showing them off. Never mind that mass shootings have become like, the new normal. If we are showing we can't be trusted, then we can't be trusted. It's pretty cut and dry.

nverno 3y ago

Which assumptions from the constitution do you think need to be rewritten? They seem to have aged astonishingly well to me, although I think they should be extended in many cases, eg. limiting government ability to mess with encrypted communications. Rewritting them in this day and age would surely limit our rights further.

pksebben 3y ago
Article 1 Section 1 is a good place to start. The system of checks and balances and the concept for the structure and format of representative government has proven itself incapable of being effective in the modern era. We get nothing done, and what we do get done is exclusively to the benefit of those that can afford to finance campaigns. Our legislative branch is an absolute joke (life terms, like, really?) and the whole idea behind the senate is meaningless in a world where we can fly from one end of the country to the other in a day, and have instantaneous communication. Our systems of voting are similarly backwards, designed in a time when you had to send a dude on a horse to communicate. Seriously, page 1 rewrite. The whole damn thing.

flagrant_taco 3y ago

What would you like to see added or removed from the constitution? Personally I'd love an amendment declaring our right to privacy, though we really just need to better enforce illegal search and seizure. > I’m also wondering what good to see in an armed citizenry being “not shabby” - and before you say something to the effect that it “keeps our government in line” try to remember they have stratospheric death robots that think your ar-15 is just adorable. So are you saying we shouldn't have the right to arm ourselves because we're already so outmatched by our own government? And to clarify here, the goal of an armed citizenry and armed militias was extremely important when we didn't have a standing military. The original goal was much less about actually making sure citizens come uld overthrow their own government, that's a modern view usually held by those who don't realize how terrible a civil war would actually be. I'm of the opinion that we should get rid of this farce that we must have a permanent, massive standing army rather than attempting to disarm all our citizens. Our military needs something to do as long as it's there, we're always going to be looking for a fight to prove why they exist.

solidsnack9000 3y ago
> ...the goal of an armed citizenry and armed militias was extremely important when we didn't have a standing military. The original goal was much less about actually making sure citizens come uld overthrow their own government, that's a modern view usually held by those who don't realize how terrible a civil war would actually be. Yes, this is something more 2nd Amendment advocates should learn about. The militia was instituted for the common defence and was characteristic of the "...organic union of society and government..." that Huntington attributes to many of the late medieval institutions which contributed to the decentralised, self-balancing system of public policy which the founders inherited from the English. https://rentry.co/72dov https://rentry.co/72dov
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  In very layman's terms, I've long viewed the original design as the wanting a educated, trained, and armed citizenry that could actually be trusted to act like adults. If needed they could form militias or even organized armies, but the default state is a nation of adults largely just living out their lives with as few government interventions as possible. We've since destroyed that goal. Our education system is trash, we don't train our citizens how to take care of or defend themselves, and the gun debate has largely devolved into "no one should have guns because we have cops and armies for that" versus "I have a right to bear arms so I can keep this oppressive government in check"
pksebben 3y ago
See, I'm a little on the other side of this. I believe in compulsory service. It's not that I think the military is all that (it isn't, source: did it myself), it's just that if we're gonna let people have weapons, it is a Good Idea to train them on how to respect them properly. It's hard to take these gun nut militias seriously when all their videos have them doing dumbass shit like barrel flagging and handling them loaded when they're just showing them off. Never mind that mass shootings have become like, the new normal. If we are showing we can't be trusted, then we can't be trusted. It's pretty cut and dry.