I recently thought of something...

I recently thought of something. Why didn't the founders just add a justification after every amendment in the Bill of Rights? Something to the effect of:
>I... To prevent the government from charging those who hold unpopular beliefs or criticizing or offending anyone.
>II... To allow the people to overthrow a tyrannical government.
etc.
It seems so obvious. This would have prevented the judiciary from growing this powerful. Why isn't this the standard for every law? I can't be the only one who's thought of this.

Attached: shall.jpg (540x720, 63K)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46
jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson’s-fair-copy
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Wow.
>Rights guaranteed
Its a document of "Negative Rights", it stops the government, not "gives" us Rights. Our Rights are assumed as natural, and from God. What does the 10th say in that book?

I wished they had remembered congressional(senate) term limits.

because the government can't give you rights, those rights are yours to begin with, no justification needed, they're just self-evident
the bill of rights is there to tell the gov the limits of it's power not to tell the people the limits of their freedom

I wish we still allowed the state reps to select senators instead of popular votes which make no sense and gives the state no power in federal gov

You're not the only one who thought of this. The problem is that no matter what you say or write, people will ignore i, a government that grows too powerful will spread propaganda and misinformation until it can squeeze through whatever law it wants. The second amendment is perfectly clear and that didn't stop it from illegally modified to allow gun control.

>Congress may not favor one religion..
Hmm.. they seem to be favoring the jews..

I wish they'd added a segment about freedom of association. Lot of problems today would be solved by a line on the bill of rights that says the state can never force you to associate with someone you don't want to associate with for whatever reason (except in cases of criminal punishment).

The federalist papers

Im always amazed how people from outside the US understand the philosophical underpinnings of the US better than Americans on this board.

It took a dozen posts or so.

Federalist papers explain why and because. Anonymously written too. Just so egos didn t get in the way of truth.

because it was unnecessary and would just invite faggots using it as justification for infringements later. as we have seen with the history of the 10th Amendment, being twisted into an implement of exactly the bullshit it was very explicitly warning against.

"the government can't give rights" = NuLibertarianFagThink

I'll be over here dealing with how the world IS, and not how it SHOULD be in an impossible Libertarian Utopian society.

No I'm not a Liberal, I'm just logical and not retarded.

This. The 2nd amendment is clearly intended for people to be able to own military equipment such as heavy cannons. Yet today it is warped to mean nothing more than single shot hunting weapons meant to kill birds.

i guess they thought that fucktarded faggots like you would be able to read and understand what they meant to begin with. shame on them i guess?

because they never conceived of a populace as stupid as we've become.

it opens a back door where the gov can void them if that “justification” is no longer current or “forseable”
this way, america has them and its no bodies buisness why

This was the original method. The 17A fucked us.

Because they are supposed to serve as maxims of law, like axiom in math. If you write the reason you limit the negative, opening the door for judiciary to fuck you.

This.

The founding fathers never conceived of a jewdicial system that would actively undermine the people and the document because there werent any jews in America.

Yes. The real question is, was it not better to clearly define the limitations of powers delegated by the const' to govt to limit abuse. Back then contract law was simple. Today your app comes with a ridiculous terms and conditions written by lawyers in an attempt to think about every possible abuse or misunderstanding....the real problem was that they abandoned the Constitution. They should have had a convention every 20 years or so. Instead, after the civil war they just decided they were going to ignore it, let the supreme Court write precedent to subvert it, and just call on it as a larp to fool the masses.

>Rights come from God
Then enforce it, retard.
You're probably an atheist too. Dumb libertarian.

"Rights" don't exist without the state.

Attached: image0-30.jpg (727x375, 100K)

T. Leviathan

they did

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._46

the jews in the media and education system would never expose you to this

jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/jefferson’s-fair-copy

You have to understand what the Constitution is.
This instrument is to define the relationship between the several states and the United States. It does not apply to individual state nationals rights. The original intent was to preserve state sovereignty.

The 14A obliterated the system.

cannons nonwithstanding fielding 150-300 flintlock-armed militiamen could in fact make a break a military engagement in america given the enormous cost of moving and provisioning an army from europe

>state sovereignty
I want to start a 10th amendment society. An amendment clearly there to say "federal government: this is your scope and thats it." Why is marijuana illegal federally? Where is the constitutional backing for that? I hate it and want it gone but the 10th clearly says fuck off feds. Interstate commerce and provide for common welfare are the most abused clauses and practically render the remaining constitution irrelevant

Yes. They rigged the system.
Most Americans are not organically subject to the United States. You are not organically a United States citizen. If I'm born in Texas for example, I'm Texan. That's it. Now, there are a number of ways you can become a US citizen and then subject to its laws. They created fake states, registered corporations, in US territory, and then invoked article 4 s.2
"All needful rules and regulations....and in affect making you engaged in interstate/international commerce, which they are allowed to regulate....so it's constitutional. Using legal mumbo jumbo, they have subverted the Constitution.

Tl;Dr
They made it such that you are a foreigners on your own land, so the 10th doesn't apply.

yeah it didn't work. it's a huge failure and the Anti-Federalists were right.

Because I didn't think of it. Sorry, it was a different time. Courts were practically arms of the church and their morality was generally beyond reproach. I didn't count on future generations being so...uneducated and gullible.