Politics How would you change the Constitution?

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
dviss1 said:
You're talking about people defending themselves from an incursion in THEIR country. Russia invaded afghanistan. Apples to Asparagus.

If the government decides to go all dystopian there will be little that we can do about it for some time save some Hunger games type revolution that would take decades.

So arming up for it like the Vegas shooter (23 guns and 19 at home) is pretty pointless.
Click to expand...

We have almost no military presence in Oregon, so any occupying force would be an invading force if Oregon were to revolt.
 
Natebishop3 said:
We have almost no military presence in Oregon, so any occupying force would be an invading force if Oregon were to revolt.
Click to expand...

YESSSSSS!!! Let's get rid of the South!!! Even though my grandmother was born in Monroe LA and I have lots of family there... That just sounds crazy...

1440106981219
 
1. I would define the term "Natural Born Citizen" instead of leaving it to common knowledge of the day.

2. Modify the 14th amendment to be consistent with the above.

3. Define standards requirements to be a voter and to become a citizen eligible to bear arms.

4. Redefine the 2nd amendment as the right of citizens to bear arm is the same as their right to self defense. This was indeed a factor in the original intent.
Natural born citizen should be required to meet the same standards to begin to bear arms.
The right to be armed for self defense is different from a non existing right to offense.
The right to bear arms should be dependent on the same standards to become a citizen voter, except in time of war or emergency as declared by the President.
 
Last edited:
MarAzul said:
Natural born citizen should be required to meet the same standards to begin to bare arms.
Click to expand...
Agreed--long-sleeved shirts should be required for all migrant workers. Sunburn-related hospitalizations for illegals cost us millions!!
 
How about adding the word "teddy" between the 21st and 22nd word of the 2nd amendment? "paddington" would also be funny. Kinda.
 
Denny Crane said:
I would change little. Maybe the 14th to apply to women and sexual orientation and anyone else who aren't treated fairly. Even then, we've added numerous layers of civil rights laws along those lines, so it would be mostly symbolic.

Maybe update the 4th to explicitly disallow mass surveillance of the population through electronic means. We already know the government is violating the 4th.

I'd be good with the gold standard and auditing the fed. Balanced budget, term limits, and line item veto are fair game if we're going to change the rules.

Speaking of the 14th... Corporations aren't people - they are made up of people. They have to be Persons for certain purposes of the law; it is one of the most misreported and misunderstood concepts. A corporation is a Person, for example, if it is minority owned and discriminated against for government contracts. I think we all would agree they shouldn't be discriminated against. (that is the famous case where the Court said "corporations are Persons" ... for the purpose of this ruling). A corporation is a Person in the sense you can sue one. A corporation is a Person in the sense that its papers are free from search without warrants. Do you really want to do away with these (and other equally important) things? When the courts have ruled about corporate Personhood, it's always been very narrow rulings about specific issues like those I mentioned.

If you believe in the 1st amendment, you cannot believe in campaign finance laws. When you have the government choosing who can speak or who can buy a megaphone (through public financing or laws restricting advertising), the ruling party will get to decide. We don't want any part of it. There will always be a loophole, anyway - like if I want to run 24/7 campaign ads, all I have to do is buy a newspaper or TV station. The best we can do is require the speaker to be identified, so we all can take that into account when forming our opinions.

We're not a Democracy. The electoral college is there for a reason, and good reason.
Click to expand...
It's true.. Democracy and political campaigns are as opposite as magnet poles.
 
dviss1 said:
At least post smart memes. This one is just dumb.
Click to expand...
Makes sense to me. Pot was illegal everywhere not long ago and everyone still smoked it. Why do you think gun laws will keep people from owning guns?
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
Makes sense to me. Pot was illegal everywhere not long ago and everyone still smoked it. Why do you think gun laws will keep people from owning guns?
Click to expand...

Because they do.

Y'all complain about mental health problems getting guns but don't want to do anything about it and claim HIPPA laws.

You don't want to do anything about this shit.
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
Makes sense to me. Pot was illegal everywhere not long ago and everyone still smoked it. Why do you think gun laws will keep people from owning guns?
Click to expand...

It won't. But I would give them some in exchange for voter competency qualification testing.
 
dviss1 said:
Because they do.

Y'all complain about mental health problems getting guns but don't want to do anything about it and claim HIPPA laws.

You don't want to do anything about this shit.
Click to expand...
Sure i do. Less gun laws for law abiding citizens. Just like i wanted pot legal as it was a waste of resources to jail people for it. Focus on getting illegal guns off the street by freeing up police to go after real criminals not pot smoking hippies.
 
MarAzul said:
It won't. But I would give them some in exchange for voter competency qualification testing.
Click to expand...
Law abiding citizens will be affected by laws. People that are willing to murder dont need to purchase a gun legally, their conscience is obviously flawed already. So how dkes me being unarmed stop some psycho from murdering people with a gun he bought from his meth dealer
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
Law abiding citizens will be affected by laws. People that are willing to murder dont need to purchase a gun legally, their conscience is obviously flawed already. So how dkes me being unarmed stop some psycho from murdering people with a gun he bought from his meth dealer
Click to expand...

Gun laws won't make any difference. Qualifying voters before they can vote would though.
 
I'd make it two-ply.

barfo
 
I would make English our national language.

I would make it so women make as much as men for the same damn job

I would legalize marijuana and prostitution, and tax the fuck out of them.

Not constitutional stuff, but it needs to be addressed
 
There are enough ballot measures as there are. I would prefer that representatives with legislative staffs and actual understanding of what bills do make decisions than voters.
 
Sedatedfork said:
There are enough ballot measures as there are. I would prefer that representatives with legislative staffs and actual understanding of what bills do make decisions than voters.
Click to expand...

How has that been working out for us lately?
 
Mediocre Man said:
I would make English our national language.

I would make it so women make as much as men for the same damn job

I would legalize marijuana and prostitution, and tax the fuck out of them.

Not constitutional stuff, but it needs to be addressed
Click to expand...
But would male hookers make as much as female hookers? Im asking for @HCP
 
@dviss1 im going to hijack this thread cause i dont feel like starting a new one. Yesterday sitting at the dealership for an oil change i listened in on 2 old veterans talk about politics. One was black, the other white. They started talking about where they served and swapped war stories. Then they talked a little trump. Both of them had the same conclusion, that the racism shit needed to stop from both ends. Meaning the people who are actually racist should shut the fuck up and the race baitors should follow suit. The conversation ended when the attendant came in to say the white guys car was done. He looked over at his new friend and said, "of course they served the white guy first." They both laughed, shook hands, and thanked eachother for thier service. It gave me a slight bit of hope for america.
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
@dviss1 im going to hijack this thread cause i dont feel like starting a new one. Yesterday sitting at the dealership for an oil change i listened in on 2 old veterans talk about politics. One was black, the other white. They started talking about where they served and swapped war stories. Then they talked a little trump. Both of them had the same conclusion, that the racism shit needed to stop from both ends. Meaning the people who are actually racist should shut the fuck up and the race baitors should follow suit. The conversation ended when the attendant came in to say the white guys car was done. He looked over at his new friend and said, "of course they served the white guy first." They both laughed, shook hands, and thanked eachother for thier service. It gave me a slight bit of hope for america.
Click to expand...

When people start to understand we are much more alike and stop quibbling over the .000001% difference between us, we tend to come together. What a great story.
I have similar situations all the time like if I have to go out to a rural area and do a game with a guy local there. I'll always try to find some type of common ground during our pregame talk.
Once something is made a joke of, it tends to disappear. Look at Hip Hop.

Making fun of racism is the best way to rid ourselves of it.
 
PtldPlatypus said:
Wait--so you're saying that if we all start to make a joke of hip-hop, it will disappear?

FINALLY, SOME @dviss1 WISDOM WE CAN USE!!!
Click to expand...

There has been a concerted effort to take hip hop from intelligence to ignorance. They (Viacom) are winning.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top