Quote:
Originally Posted by MiddleAgedAl
I did read the books. I dont think that everything from 237 years ago is completely relevant for todays very different world. That's not a "better" example, IMHO.
As wise as they were, the founding fathers who composed the constitution and amendments were humans, and fallible. Not perfect.
I dont believe it's disrespectful to suggest that they could not have been expected to possibly predict the kind of world we live in today. Change to society accelerates with time.
In fact, I would suggest that is irrational or illogical to always fall back on the "but the constitution says x, and that cannot be questioned, it shall remain completely relevant for all enternity". I'm not saying flippantly discard it, but I am saying it makes sense to pause and ask "does this still make sense today; and if not, then why continue to cling to it blindly?" That's not treason, it's refusing to mindlessly become an unquestioning slave to dogma.
The point I was trying to make was that even with the 2nd amendment, clearly it provided no deterrent whatsoever to discourage the government from doing oppressive/bad things to it's citizens. 1776 it was not.
But things change. 1942 to 2001 was only 59 years, not 200, and yet what we did NOT see was a repeat of the pearl harbor era internment camps pop-up, (only this time for arabs after sep 11). If society hadnt changed in 59 years, then there would have been such camps, or at least serious public discussion of creating such camps, even if the idea never materialized. That didnt happen.
|
Al, you're starting to piss me off because I am starting to agree with you... in part. Things do need to be relooked at from time to time. This is something i see daily as a Marine. Marines absolutely love our history and we are nostalgic as fuck. There are many order and directives and such that once made sense but now....don't. We still blindly enforce them unknowing of the original purpose only referencing things we had heard and basically folk lore.
Here is a little analogy I love;
In a cage you have 5 monkeys. Hanging in the center above the monkeys is a banana. Whenever the monkeys attempt to go the banana they are hosed with water, which upsets them. This is done enough to make the monkeys not attempt to get the banana. Put the hose away. Now take one of the original 5 monkeys out and replace it with a new monkey. The new monkey will attempt to go for the banana and will be beaten by the original 4 still remaining. He doesn't know why, but he understands that if he goes for the banana, he's getting a beating. Now replace another of the 4 original with a new monkey. The new monkey will attempt to go for the banana and will be beaten by the remaining original 3 and the 1st replacement. Continue this process until you have none of the original monkeys in the cage. They know that if one attempts to get the banana they have to beat him, but they don't know why.
Many laws, including the constitution do need to be revised for the times. I don't know if you were trying to say that the 59 year difference isn't significant enough only based on the number, but in case you are that point again needs further thought. The change in societies around the world have changed more in the last 60 years than the 60 years before them. Imagine going back 20 years and showing someone a smart phone for instance. Society has changed in so many ways mostly based around technology and the ease of access to information from anywhere and incredibly fast speeds.
Common ground does need to be found for the 2nd amendment issue. Both sides are widely out of control in their arguments. Again I love guns because they are fun to shoot, I am a recreational shooter. Right now however I am afraid that I will not make it back to the states soon enough to buy the kind of firearms I want before a ban is pushed through without a logical, sensible, civilized discussion.