Quote:
Originally Posted by 97240sx
Law and the constitution are not concrete. It is constantly being re-interpreted becuase law is a never-ending enterprise. It is a constant process to improve ourselves.
A lot of things didn't even exist when the constitution was written. Cars, automatic weapons, nuclear devices. Many things could not have possibly been considered back then. The constitution has no mention of nukes; therefore a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment would mean that every citizen has the right to own a personal nuclear device.
You are living in a world of mental boundries and limitations my friend. We modify things on an as needed basis in order to preserve ourselves collectively. If we did not, then society would collapse.
So again we come back to: Your interpretation is right and everyone else is wrong.
You're preaching, but you are not listening. What use is there of a one-sided conversation? So the question is: Why are you and your little cult right, and why are the rest of the SIX BILLION people on this planet wrong?
|
Notice how the founding fathers didn't specify that an individual had the right to own bombs.
Arms, in their time, were personal guns and rifles. They recognized that a people had to be armed in order to put down a tyrannical or corrupt government.
Also, I have a major issue with this.
Quote:
|
Law and the constitution are not concrete. It is constantly being re-interpreted because law is a never-ending enterprise.
|
Any corrupt leader who doesn't have "mental limitations" could exploit this statement to make the case that free speech isn't in the best interests of the US. While it is true that the constitution didn't lay out a design for the court system or criminal rulings, what the constitution does state should always be taken literally. If it is not, you can count on the fact that someone will abuse it.