If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 09:26:53 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14
Author Topic: If you could introduce a Constitutional Amendment What would it be  (Read 69575 times)
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #175 on: November 12, 2017, 09:35:31 PM »

A repeal of the Second Amendment.

Only active duty army and active duty police (and you could argue the latter) should be allowed to have guns. We don't need militias anymore.
And what exactly happens to the hundreds of millions of firearms currently in the USA? And the millions of people who'd rather be shot defending their guns than have them taken away?

I'd propose paying people off in exchange for their guns. Like a gun buyback.

As for the millions of people who would rather be shot...either draft them into the military, where they can use a gun (as long as they're there anyway), or just give them what they want and shoot them if they won't surrender their guns peacefully.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #176 on: November 13, 2017, 12:03:36 AM »

shoot them if they won't surrender their guns peacefully.

Money quote!
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #177 on: November 13, 2017, 12:10:06 AM »

Allow a supermajority of state legislators (probably 2/3) to overturn federal laws.
While I can somewhat see the sense of a supermajority of State legislatures having that power (tho I think it a poor idea) but a supermajority of State legislators is ridiculous. New Hampshire has over three times as many legislators as California.

Both you and Solid seem to have missed the point of this thread. It's not for laundry lists of left- or right-wing ideas, but for you to put forward the singular Constitutional amendment you think is most needed, and also why you think so.
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #178 on: November 13, 2017, 10:47:51 AM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.
Logged
Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas
Ray Goldfield
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,608


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #179 on: November 13, 2017, 03:43:17 PM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.

Your endgame, if needed, is still the mass murder of US citizens if they don't comply with being disarmed.

You would have another civil war on your hands in a hurry.
Logged
America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗
TexArkana
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,385
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #180 on: November 13, 2017, 06:46:57 PM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.

Your endgame, if needed, is still the mass murder of US citizens if they don't comply with being disarmed.

You would have another civil war on your hands in a hurry.

As much as I disagree with you on everything else, on this we can agree. what NewYorkExpress is talking about is an amazingly horrible idea.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #181 on: November 13, 2017, 07:09:44 PM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.

Your endgame, if needed, is still the mass murder of US citizens if they don't comply with being disarmed.

You would have another civil war on your hands in a hurry.

As much as I disagree with you on everything else, on this we can agree. what NewYorkExpress is talking about is an amazingly horrible idea.

I wonder if he'd be willing to shoot me ...
Logged
NewYorkExpress
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,823
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #182 on: November 13, 2017, 07:49:41 PM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.

Your endgame, if needed, is still the mass murder of US citizens if they don't comply with being disarmed.

You would have another civil war on your hands in a hurry.

As much as I disagree with you on everything else, on this we can agree. what NewYorkExpress is talking about is an amazingly horrible idea.

I wonder if he'd be willing to shoot me ...

Not in person, obviously... and I don't believe it will be necessary, if you pay citizens enough to hand in their guns.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #183 on: November 13, 2017, 08:29:45 PM »


You completely ignored the rest of the quote... I also suggested drafting them into the military, where they would be allowed to use a gun to their heart's content as long as they're there, or paying them sizable sums of money to buy the guns from them.

Your endgame, if needed, is still the mass murder of US citizens if they don't comply with being disarmed.

You would have another civil war on your hands in a hurry.

As much as I disagree with you on everything else, on this we can agree. what NewYorkExpress is talking about is an amazingly horrible idea.

I wonder if he'd be willing to shoot me ...

Not in person, obviously... and I don't believe it will be necessary, if you pay citizens enough to hand in their guns.

$500 million tax free is my minimum asking price for my $600 rifle. I wont sell out my God given rights cheaply.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #184 on: November 13, 2017, 10:43:35 PM »

$500 million tax free is my minimum asking price for my $600 rifle. I wont sell out my God given rights cheaply.
Then I presume you'll cheerfully pay property tax and an annual license fee on your rifle, just as you do your motor vehicle.  And let's not forget your shooting license and mandatory liability insurance.  There's no constitutional bar to treating guns similarly to motor vehicles, and every reason to do so.
Logged
Dr. MB
MB
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,813
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #185 on: November 13, 2017, 11:53:59 PM »

$500 million tax free is my minimum asking price for my $600 rifle. I wont sell out my God given rights cheaply.
Then I presume you'll cheerfully pay property tax and an annual license fee on your rifle, just as you do your motor vehicle.  And let's not forget your shooting license and mandatory liability insurance.  There's no constitutional bar to treating guns similarly to motor vehicles, and every reason to do so.
We should get rid of vehicle registration.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #186 on: November 14, 2017, 12:00:15 AM »

$500 million tax free is my minimum asking price for my $600 rifle. I wont sell out my God given rights cheaply.
Then I presume you'll cheerfully pay property tax and an annual license fee on your rifle, just as you do your motor vehicle.  And let's not forget your shooting license and mandatory liability insurance.  There's no constitutional bar to treating guns similarly to motor vehicles, and every reason to do so.

That only applies if you drive on public roads. I presume by this logic I can still be off-grid if I keep my rifle in my home correct?
Logged
Sirius_
Ninja0428
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,083
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.00, S: -7.91


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #187 on: November 14, 2017, 11:08:33 AM »

Replace the electoral college with the alternative vote.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #188 on: November 14, 2017, 06:39:55 PM »

$500 million tax free is my minimum asking price for my $600 rifle. I wont sell out my God given rights cheaply.
Then I presume you'll cheerfully pay property tax and an annual license fee on your rifle, just as you do your motor vehicle.  And let's not forget your shooting license and mandatory liability insurance.  There's no constitutional bar to treating guns similarly to motor vehicles, and every reason to do so.

That only applies if you drive on public roads. I presume by this logic I can still be off-grid if I keep my rifle in my home correct?

At least in this state, the property tax is due regardless of where you use your car. All using a motor vehicle only off the public roads saves you is the annual license fee. The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #189 on: November 14, 2017, 07:48:08 PM »

The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

No it doesn't.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #190 on: November 14, 2017, 08:45:58 PM »

The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

No it doesn't.

Why should the rest of society bear the cost of gun fetishists and the violence begotten by placing guns above people?
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #191 on: November 14, 2017, 11:08:23 PM »

The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

No it doesn't.

Why should the rest of society bear the cost of gun fetishists and the violence begotten by placing guns above people?

That's like saying Muslims should have to pay a Muslim tax because a tiny minority of adherents of their religion commit terrorism. There are 350 Million guns in private hands, whatever externalities you think exist apply to a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. Self-defense is an inalienable right, and no amount of saying "guns am skerry" changes that. There are externalities involved in freedom of speech, in due process rights, in religious freedom, in allowing people to gather ...
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #192 on: November 15, 2017, 02:39:49 AM »

The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

No it doesn't.

Why should the rest of society bear the cost of gun fetishists and the violence begotten by placing guns above people?

That's like saying Muslims should have to pay a Muslim tax because a tiny minority of adherents of their religion commit terrorism. There are 350 Million guns in private hands, whatever externalities you think exist apply to a fraction of a fraction of a fraction. Self-defense is an inalienable right, and no amount of saying "guns am skerry" changes that. There are externalities involved in freedom of speech, in due process rights, in religious freedom, in allowing people to gather ...

A fraction of a fraction of a fraction!?  There are over 100,000 gun injuries per year, of which over 30,000 die each year.  That's more than 10 times as many deaths per year as have died from Islamic terrorism in this country ever.  Heck, in a typical year more people are killed by being shot by toddlers than are killed by terrorists.  When you look at the numbers, the guns in our society are far more of a danger to us than the terrorists have been. No amount of saying "second amendment" changes that.

Even at the broadest possible definition of gun externalities that is put out there, it still comes to a bit under $1000 per gun per year.  Making gun owners pay the cost of their fetish won't prevent anyone who thinks they need one for self-defense or other reasons from getting one.  But it hopefully would make them think whether they really are worthwhile.
Logged
Mr. Reactionary
blackraisin
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,784
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.45, S: -3.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #193 on: November 15, 2017, 07:13:14 AM »

Assuming 1 injury per gun, 100,000/350,000,000. Means .03% of all guns injure someone each year. What an epidemic.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #194 on: November 15, 2017, 08:44:01 AM »

We worry about far less dangerous things than guns. It's gun fetishists that make massacres possible.  And I don't mean Las Vegas or Sutherland Springs. I mean the thousands who die from domestic violence.

Guns objectively don't make us safer. The US routinely ranks as one of the more crime-riddled countries, and one of the most crime-riddled developed countries despite the supposed self-defense uses of guns.  People in households owning a gun have a higher death rate.

The very premise enshrined in the second amendment ”a well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, " is demonstrably untrue. The days when a militia could defend us from a foreign adversary are long gone, if they ever existed at all. The statistics about gun violence show they fail to protect us from domestic adversaries.

That said, confiscation wouldn't work. We need to make guns rarer, not drive them underground. We need to make gun ownership be seen as a responsibility. We don't need to repeal the second amendment to do that. Besides, getting rid of the second amendment would do nothing about our culture of gun violence, which is why the various amendments here that attempt social engineering earn my contempt. You'd think we'd have learned from the lesson of the eighteenth amendment.
Logged
Dr. MB
MB
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,813
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #195 on: November 15, 2017, 08:16:36 PM »

Assuming 1 injury per gun, 100,000/350,000,000. Means .03% of all guns injure someone each year. What an epidemic.
And who knows how many of those are accidental shooting in the foot.
Logged
Karpatsky
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,545
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #196 on: November 16, 2017, 11:20:46 AM »


At least in this state, the property tax is due regardless of where you use your car. All using a motor vehicle only off the public roads saves you is the annual license fee. The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

Not sure the analogy holds. It's a reasonable expectation that car owners are also users of highways, and the overlap is likely quite high. It is not a similarly reasonable expectation that gun owners are consumers (or causers, if you want to put it like that) of those services.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #197 on: November 17, 2017, 09:41:19 AM »


At least in this state, the property tax is due regardless of where you use your car. All using a motor vehicle only off the public roads saves you is the annual license fee. The property tax is general revenue, the license pays for highways. By analogy, having gun owners pay for the costs of investigating gun crimes, ER and other medical costs of gunshot victims, etc. seems quite reasonable.

Not sure the analogy holds. It's a reasonable expectation that car owners are also users of highways, and the overlap is likely quite high. It is not a similarly reasonable expectation that gun owners are consumers (or causers, if you want to put it like that) of those services.

Without gun owners, there couldn't be gun violence. Guns don't magically spring into existence thanks to fairy gunmothers.
Logged
Keep cool-idge
Benjamin Harrison he is w
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,770
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #198 on: November 19, 2017, 04:23:28 PM »

I would do

Amendment to ban discrimination based on race so we can finely repeal the civil rights act.

Amendment to bring back school prayer and the Ten Commandments in school class rooms

Amendment to make house seats term limited to 8 terms but I would make it that you can come back after 6 years have passed since your last term

Amendment to make senate seats term limited to 3 terms but that you can come back after 6 years.

Amendment to ban abortion in all cases.

And finally repeal all of the 14th amendment it has in some ways ruined American with Birth right citizenship abs causing the rights of the states to be ruined because it caused school prayer to be taken away took away states rights on marriage and took away the rights of the unborn.
Logged
MarkD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,131
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #199 on: November 19, 2017, 08:42:02 PM »
« Edited: November 21, 2017, 12:42:57 PM by MarkD »

I would do

1} Amendment to ban discrimination based on race so we can finely repeal the civil rights act.

2} Amendment to bring back school prayer and the Ten Commandments in school class rooms

3} Amendment to make house seats term limited to 8 terms but I would make it that you can come back after 6 years have passed since your last term

4} Amendment to make senate seats term limited to 3 terms but that you can come back after 6 years.

5} Amendment to ban abortion in all cases.

6} And finally repeal all of the 14th amendment it has in some ways ruined American with Birth right citizenship abs causing the rights of the states to be ruined because it caused school prayer to be taken away took away states rights on marriage and took away the rights of the unborn.

1} I'm not sure what you mean. The last clause in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment is the Equal Protection Clause, which has always been interpreted, correctly, as a ban on racial discrimination by state governments. Do you want to adopt an amendment that bans racial discrimination by private enterprise the way the Civil Rights Act does?

2} Acceptable to me. I'm not sure about the likelihood of getting ratification, but I hope with you.

3 and 4} I have always been opposed to term limits. I would rather repeal the 22nd Amendment that adopt amendments that impose more term limits. Nonetheless, I support a political movement called Convention of States Project. I have created a thread about it here, in the Constitution and Law category. Please look for that thread - Convention of States. I support this movement, which is also trying to adopt term limits, for other reasons.

5} I oppose this too. I have a hard time believing the pro-life movement because they don't seem to be interested (most of them, anyway) in trying to impose any punishment on the woman who asks to get an abortion. Maybe you're not in that group and you would want harsh punishment on the woman who asks for an abortion, but if so, you appear to be so outnumbered that you won't get legislation passed saying so. Your idea for a constitutional amendment is just plain too extreme to get ratified .... by 38 states.

6} Maybe you've seen my signature already. I am very, very dedicated to trying to REWRITE Section 1 of the 14th Amendment -- the second sentence of it. I'm not sure how popular would be an amendment that just repeals the first sentence (defining citizenship in such a way as to create the "birthright citizenship" problem); maybe it would be too hard to get ratification of that. But I will work my fingers to the bone to try to get a complete rewrite of this sentence:
"No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the Privileges or Immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, or deny to any person within its jurisdiction of the equal protection of the laws."
That sentence should not be repealed, it should be rewritten so as to make the rules of what states cannot much clearer. Again, read my signature.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9 10 11 12 13 14  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.065 seconds with 12 queries.