[G66enigma]

If the first ten Amendments (aka, the Bill Of Rights) of the U.S. Constitution were to be reconsidered and potentially revised, what would you like to see be the wording of each?

1. Say, with the preamble to the BOR, to ensure its purpose is patently clear and cannot be misconstrued.

2. Or, with the 1A, as to what Government shall not be capable of doing, perhaps on pain of hanging for encroaching on a person's rights here.

3. Or perhaps with the 2A, to make it crystal clear that the individual has every right to arms, weapons, tools, accessories and other implements of defense the individual deems useful and appropriate, and so on.

4. Or possibly with the 4A, to make it crystal clear that no searches or seizures of any kind are to be allowed or tolerated without a formal warrant obtain via the independent Judiciary, supported by oaths or affirmations and describing the specific ...

Wish one or more of these first ten amendments were different? Got suggestions on alterations to such text?

Considering that GA is the 38th of 50 states to consider agreeing to a Convention of States for the purpose of doing exactly this sort of thing, it might be an interesting exercise to see what some people might like to see get done.

 

[Wolfspirit]

The BOR is written very plain.
What is needed is 2 amendment to force courts to outlaw " prcedence" a made up term.
And one that plainly forces lawmakers and courts to follow the COTUS as written , with a mandatory 20 yr prision term for any representative senator or judge that attempts to stray from that exact wording.

 

[Mouser]

I don't think clarification is the root of our problem today. I think there are a couple of key things missed by our founders...number one is term limits for all elected officials and 2) ability to pass laws/exempt/grant unique privileges' to themselves. Aside from that, the BOR is spot on but those "chinks in the armor" allow a criminal element to take hold and exploit the citizens of this nation. There were many key events, particularly the wars we fought, that expanded the power and scope of gov't. First, the Civil War and then WWII of note in particular....with many other things like the creation of the Federal reserve, The New Deal, the 17th Amendment etc etc etc

 

[Sniper03]

I am with Wolfe the BOR is exactly what it implies! And those violating it's principle should be held accountable by the law!

03

 

[Wolfspirit]

I don't think clarification is the root of our problem today. I think there are a couple of key things missed by our founders...number one is term limits for all elected officials and 2) ability to pass laws/exempt/grant unique privileges' to themselves. Aside from that, the BOR is spot on but those "chinks in the armor" allow a criminal element to take hold and exploit the citizens of this nation. There were many key events, particularly the wars we fought, that expanded the power and scope of gov't. First, the Civil War and then WWII of note in particular....with many other things like the creation of the Federal reserve, The New Deal, the 17th Amendment etc etc etc

Term limits simply make all legislators lame duck, dont have to worry about relection , and do as they please with no consequences.

While i understand the emotion that drives the desire to automatically kick the bums we dont like, we also automatically kick out the ones we do.

And , if the election process can be fixed , term limits simply eliminates any fear of answering to the voters who elected them.

One of worst things that could happen

 

[G66enigma]

I don't think clarification is the root of our problem today.

Some sort of clarification of the BOR's purpose and what's allowed to be fiddled with needs to be made, since clearly there is a disconnect. Most of the hired help in legislatures across the country fail to "get" the nature of the BOR as a definition of constraints and flat denials of authority in the space.

However the rework is done, whether it's in the BOR phraseology or elsewhere, the staff don't quite get it. Including SCOTUS.

 

[leadcounsel]

I haven't put much thought on this but my gut reaction is
1. It's written quite well and plain and pretty great as it is.
2. I like the idea of term limits.
3. The Constitution should have dis-allowed fiat currency.
4. For the 1A, 2A, 4A, etc. the word "contemporary equivalent" or similar should be inserted. This would eliminate a lot of headaches and arguments. While it is plainly meant, the nefarious folks argue it only applies to the past (e.g. Muskets).
5. I would apply CRIMINAL penalties to those legislatures who try to do away with rights, and a requirement of 100% uniformity to alter/change/eliminate these rights. It has to be fully unanimous to change them. And fringe minority judges or legislatures who infringe go to prison and are fined.

 

[Mouser]

Term limits simply make all legislators lame duck, dont have to worry about relection , and do as they please with no consequences.

While i understand the emotion that drives the desire to automatically kick the bums we dont like, we also automatically kick out the ones we do.

And , if the election process can be fixed , term limits simply eliminates any fear of answering to the voters who elected them.

One of worst things that could happen

We can only conjecture about what may be though my own experiences tells me elected positions should not be career positions. If a person is in a "lame duck'" term that person will likely behave in a way that is consistent with their own personal principles. The entire dynamic of party power and power collected by virtue of seniority likely disappears. I have a personal experience where a person (who I consider a friend) assumed a high level union position on an interim basis after a resignation. That person's actions were grounded in his own value system...at some point he decided to run for the position and I felt like he became more of an "appeaser" trying to please everyone but not. His behavior definitely changed and he became much more "whishy washy" imo...anyways, there would be only one lame duck term and just like the President position, behavior would likely be different but I don't think it would be a bad thing. The amount of power, wealth and the resulting corruption will likely be the undoing of our republic...and yes, all countries and political systems eventually fall...there is a defined life cycle and my fear is that we are much closer to the end of that cycle than I would have thought possible.

 

[Wolfspirit]

We can only conjecture about what may be though my own experiences tells me elected positions should not be career positions. If a person is in a "lame duck'" term that person will likely behave in a way that is consistent with their own personal principles. The entire dynamic of party power and power collected by virtue of seniority likely disappears. I have a personal experience where a person (who I consider a friend) assumed a high level union position on an interim basis after a resignation. That person's actions were grounded in his own value system...at some point he decided to run for the position and I felt like he became more of an "appeaser" trying to please everyone but not. His behavior definitely changed and he became much more "whishy washy" imo...anyways, there would be only one lame duck term and just like the President position, behavior would likely be different but I don't think it would be a bad thing. The amount of power, wealth and the resulting corruption will likely be the undoing of our republic...and yes, all countries and political systems eventually fall...there is a defined life cycle and my fear is that we are much closer to the end of that cycle than I would have thought possible.

If we correct our broken election system, elections are term limits.
If the voters dont like what their rep does they vote him or her out.
Term limits serve no purpose but to make a person in power answerable to no one .

 

[Donn]

Term limits are a non-starter, at least at the national level. MHO? There should be a mandatory retirement age. We have way too many senior citizens at the levers of power wearing Depends and on cognitive meds. They can't even stay awake during House and Senate sessions. Much of the private sector has mandatory retirement, it's time government did too. Nothing against seniors, I am one, but I don't make decisions affecting millions of my fellow citizens.

 

[Mouser]

Looking for any politician to self govern/limit their own terms is a non-starter. If the system doesn't have a mechanism to ensure a peaceful transition of power, said system will collect the power hungry and they will spend their time chiseling away at the checks and balances that keep them in check...been happening for over 200 years and now we have career politicians who practice insider trading, have lifetime retirement benefits, their own healthcare system and most recently erected a wall and armed it with soldiers to protect their workplace for what? from what? They pass laws allowing behavior that would land any of us in prison, as well as a two-tiered justice system and a bunch of other priveledges that just wouldn't be important if a person served two terms and went back into the private sector to earn a living.

it is simply human nature to spend ones time attempting to secure the gains one made by eliminating competition from other humans...that is as predictable as the sunrise...so, we may just have to agree to disagree on this. IMO our nation is in a real bad place with one party controlling three houses and that party is not John F Kennedy's party...My grade school was a community fallout shelter, I grew up near a missile base and communism was a bad thing, coming out of the Vietnam war...What I watch unfolding before me is heart wrenching to me and our bill of rights is not up for debate...but somehow it is. I never thought I'd see the day in my lifetime...Freedom of speech, the press and religion is being infringed and in some cases eliminated...The BOR is not the problem. Not following them and enforcement of them is the problem. The courts are supposed to be the "check and balance" on unconstitutional law and our courts have become impotent and about to become irrelevant.

 

[G66enigma]

it is simply human nature to spend ones time attempting to secure the gains one made by eliminating competition from other humans...that is as predictable as the sunrise...

Yup.

Which is why it's so vital to have certain iron-clad constraints that are effectively (effectively, mind you) impossible to get around. Whether that's slight rewording of the BOR's key prohibitions, or a flat hanging offense crafted for any fumbling with the BOR, or other mechanisms.

'Cause, as you remind everyone, it's human nature to push that envelope. Power corrupts. And when disregarded and ignored by people, that power ultimately turns into absolute power. Unless they're lopped off at the knees when attempts get made, and/or lopped off at the head if bad enough.

 

[Missouribound]

Nothing needs to be changed.
It isn't up for interpretation. But if it was, then the first needs to be changed.
The founders didn't write the first amendment to protect liars, yet the media relies on that protection everyday.