Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 12:14:44 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri


The Federal Government was created by a pact among the States and the People. ALL Federal authority is granted by the People and States. That is the only way to have any protection against a Federal tyranny.



How does that work? How can the state be other than the will of the people? The state does not exist without the people. There is no contract with the state except the state be the spokesman/mouthpiece of the people.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 12:18:39 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: BamaD


As such, those states that wanted to seceded from the union before the civil war should have been allowed to.

I am not kidding.

That view was taught at West Point until about 1850.


Yeah right
Of course you would have a cite for this half truth in search of a whole lie to support?


(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 12:34:44 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
FR,

Occasionally, I take people off hide for reminders as to why they have been put on hide.

Job well done recently. Very well done.

_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 12:44:53 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
...That is the only way to have any protection against a Federal tyranny.

Do you realize just how pathetically paranoid that sounds, Desi??

Maybe 200-odd years ago it might have been relevant.
These days, it is just laughable and makes no sense at all.

When the USA was still in separate lumps on the same continent, federalism would make sense.
But since the USA became conglomerated (and supposedly "united"), federalism just doesn't work so well if you are going to be a single entity.


_____________________________

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.
George Orwell, 1903-1950


(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 12:51:15 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

FR,

Occasionally, I take people off hide for reminders as to why they have been put on hide.

Job well done recently. Very well done.


Why don't you answer the question and take your condescension and stick it up your ass

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 1:17:42 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
...That is the only way to have any protection against a Federal tyranny.

Do you realize just how pathetically paranoid that sounds, Desi??
Maybe 200-odd years ago it might have been relevant.
These days, it is just laughable and makes no sense at all.
When the USA was still in separate lumps on the same continent, federalism would make sense.
But since the USA became conglomerated (and supposedly "united"), federalism just doesn't work so well if you are going to be a single entity.


Part of the problem is that we are no longer "united states" of America. We are no longer 50 individual states united as one. We are but one conglomerate. That wasn't the intention, though.

The intention was that the Federal Government would deal with things that impacted the nation as a whole, 'exterior' things, and would settle differences between or among the individual states. State government, though, would deal with the interior things. Each State would be governed how the citizens of that state would decide. Each level of government would deal less and less with the individual, according to how far away that level of government was. Here, local/city/township/etc. would deal with residents as individuals. Counties wouldn't have as much direct governance over individuals, but would be there to govern the local/city/township/etc. levels within it's borders. State governments would have even less direct dealings with individuals, but would govern the counties within it's borders.

Somehow, that all got fucked up.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 1:23:42 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Part of the problem is that we are no longer "united states" of America. We are no longer 50 individual states united as one. We are but one conglomerate. That wasn't the intention, though.

Cite please


The intention was that the Federal Government would deal with things that impacted the nation as a whole, 'exterior' things, and would settle differences between or among the individual states. State government, though, would deal with the interior things. Each State would be governed how the citizens of that state would decide. Each level of government would deal less and less with the individual, according to how far away that level of government was. Here, local/city/township/etc. would deal with residents as individuals. Counties wouldn't have as much direct governance over individuals, but would be there to govern the local/city/township/etc. levels within it's borders. State governments would have even less direct dealings with individuals, but would govern the counties within it's borders.



Perhaps you could show us where you found this pile of dog shit. It is not in the constitution. It is not in the federalist or anti federalist papers.
It is not in any of the writtings of the founders so just where do you come up with this idiotic tripe?


Somehow, that all got fucked up.

That never was and was never imagined.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 2:37:56 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
Des, that is because some people are addicted to power. Think of the kind of people who run for office, especially at the federal level. They want more and more power, over the whole world actually. Same with the UN, the UN official definition of peace is "absence of opposition". Now just how do you achieve absence of opposition ?

Putting Saddam in power and then taking him put may have been for the oil companies of course, but it satisfied a perverted need these people have. And I don't mean that in a good way. Every military action since WW2 has been for corporate interests and quite a few before that. Like the campaigns in South America. Smedley Butler had quite a bit to say about that shit in his "War Is A Racket".

It is a symbiotic relationship between greed and those addicted to power. This power thing, well let's put it this way, when I was young and dumb and full of cum I had a car with 400HP. I liked being able to blow the doors off Vettes. What is that ? Now, older, a car is just a form of transportation, not a toy. In fact with the increased population there are so few places you can race it is not worth it. Buy economy and think it is cool to be able to go farther on each ounce of gasoline.

But those people never matured to that point because they were all born into money. If any one of them could be dictator they would, in fact that idiot G W Bush even said it. Something like dictators are OK as long as I am the dictator.

But in a discussion recently I find some people reluctant to vote for Trump because they think he will run his mouth before engaging his brain. Other than that they like much of his ideas but are going to do a write in. Alot of people are "ABC", Anyone But Clinton.

Anyway, if you have a certain type of personality and are born with enough money, the next step is usually political power. I have determined, and found very little disagreement with, that the smart ones do not want to be President. Do you see anyone from the Monsanto famiiy running for office ? Bill Gates has never even ran for dog catcher. Anyone from MENSA saying they know how to sove a bunch of this nation's problems ?

Nope, because they know they can't. Get elected and the system has you by the balls, or hamstrings, or whatever. And that was by design so one person can't fuck the place up. but now we have a gang of 535 of the fucking the place up because that kind of job attracts that kind of people. It is somewhat like the kinds of people who want to be cops. Sure some are good and want to serve the community, but there are plenty with that power trip problem.

When they get a politician who really wants to serve they get rid of him. Look at Jim Trafficant. Read the whole history of what happened with him, he was actually framed. Know what else ? When they got Saddam they could only convict him of like three murders of some shit like that. And then Obama sends a drone to kill THE SON of a terrorist.

It's not what you do it's who you are. And that satisfies that power urge. Been there. Been to court and skated because I had the right lawyer. I rewrote that song "I Fought The Law" to go "And I won". Well not really but you know what I mean I think.

I grew out of that shit, they didn't. They are worse than Hitler, don't quite kill as many as Stalin, but are like Napoleon or Genghis Kahn, they just cannot achieve the amount of power needed to try to take over the world because of the modern systems of government. Not peculiar to America either. Remember when they said the sun never sets on the British Empire ? Think all those countries volunteered ? Fuck no.

And now, between the US and UK, they have managed to create two billion enemies. Let's not even go into Israel, partly because there are only seven million of them. And they must have about the same defense as the US. This supposed Iron Dome we pay for, it can't stop rockets from Gaza or the West Bank ?

It has been speculated, by a quite intelligent person who is an international lawyer, that Israel sponsors some of those rocket attacks for PR value. Just the fact that there are no dead Jews supports that, AND, there is no refuting evidence that I can find. Israel is known for false flag operations so their credibility was already out the window.

Their meglomaniacs I think are the only ones in the world worse than ours. Even Putin. Sure, I am sure he wants back a little more territory. But he is not committing mass murder to get it. People do not realize that the People of Georgia ASK FOR HELP. And the Russia troops in Ukraine have no business there as far as Putin is concerned. Well maybe, but he did not send them. There are alot of Russians with family there. And Crimea, you simply cannot commit vote fraud to that degree. Vote fraud work when it is a close margin, but that was too wide a margin.

But of course Putin does have that condition, he is just older and wiser now than i his KGB days. Our politicians are like children.

You do not see Russian military bases in 130+ countries. You don't see Russia invading any country that has something saleable. And you don't see China doing it, you don't see India doing though each of them has plenty of manpower for the task, and plenty of money. Nukes mean shit. You cannot take over a country with nukes, all you can do it destroy it. Or you can pull a Japan, destroy part of it and then pay to rebuild it with modern factories that cost us jobs. And in the end, everything.

What happens when the US government can no longer pay the soldiers ? What happens when a city can no longer pay the cops ? People usually do not work for free, so I don't see much difference between that and anarchy. Back in 2012 the city of Scranton, PA cut the pay of their cops and firemen to minimum wage.

To risk your life ? Fuck you. Why didn't they cut the pay of the mayor and city councilmen ?

One of these days, if USians ever grow a fucking backbone, the politicians will be shown that they have gone too far. There will be 200 million guns pointed at them. The US will have to nuke the US, think they will ? Unfortunately, from what I have seen they just might. Those with that type of personality might start thinking "If I can't have it then nobody else can either" and destroy it.

I would feel sorry for people who have kids but it just isn't in me anymore. By the time I was 35 I knew more dead people than alive, people who mattered to me and were around my age. We are not taking old geezers here we are talking good people, good friends and a cousin as well, in their 30s. I turned to stone.

I got little second cousins. The only nice thing is they are getting raised right, and each and every one of the is going to get gun training in the basement. And at the last funeral, there was not one tattoo visible and not one male with an ear piercing. And no piercings anywhere else either. Not to put anyone down, but in that family such things are simply not done. But I tell you this, they can get a fucking job.

Anyway, to the OP - laws should expire. Make those pieces of shit work for that $170,000 a year. And go ahead and have a thousand page law against murder for example. I say that the law should be that any legislation must be hand written by an elected legislator. In a decade the law would be simple. No more hiring twenty monkeys and giving them typewriters, which is what it seems to be now. And I mean make them hand write it. With the money they make I think they should be able to read and write.

I just scanned snopes real quick and the sale of cabbage regulations is not 27,000 words. But it is 1,000. Well, 1,000 is ridiculous. It is like what they call holocaust deniers. If you question the six million figure you are an anti-Semite. Bullshit, they only killed about three million, but did I say that makes it alright ? People take that implication. Think about a head of fucking cabbage.

I know I am loquacious and tend to write long posts. But if it was something to become law I would keep it succinct, short as possible and easy to understand. As a lawmaker I would consider that my duty. Not these motherfuckers.

T^T

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 2:54:31 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Part of the problem is that we are no longer "united states" of America. We are no longer 50 individual states united as one. We are but one conglomerate. That wasn't the intention, though.

Cite please


The intention was that the Federal Government would deal with things that impacted the nation as a whole, 'exterior' things, and would settle differences between or among the individual states. State government, though, would deal with the interior things. Each State would be governed how the citizens of that state would decide. Each level of government would deal less and less with the individual, according to how far away that level of government was. Here, local/city/township/etc. would deal with residents as individuals. Counties wouldn't have as much direct governance over individuals, but would be there to govern the local/city/township/etc. levels within it's borders. State governments would have even less direct dealings with individuals, but would govern the counties within it's borders.



Perhaps you could show us where you found this pile of dog shit. It is not in the constitution. It is not in the federalist or anti federalist papers.
It is not in any of the writtings of the founders so just where do you come up with this idiotic tripe?


Somehow, that all got fucked up.

That never was and was never imagined.



You have a very poor understanding of this. You really should stay out of it, you are embarrassing yourself.

The fucking tenth amendment proves you 100 % wrong. and there are other things. I have read the Constitution but it was years ago, but I remember enough to refute plenty of what you spew along with your unwarranted attempts at insulting people who obviously know more than you.

Have you even read the Constitution ?

T^T

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 5:35:53 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Part of the problem is that we are no longer "united states" of America. We are no longer 50 individual states united as one. We are but one conglomerate. That wasn't the intention, though.
Cite please
The intention was that the Federal Government would deal with things that impacted the nation as a whole, 'exterior' things, and would settle differences between or among the individual states. State government, though, would deal with the interior things. Each State would be governed how the citizens of that state would decide. Each level of government would deal less and less with the individual, according to how far away that level of government was. Here, local/city/township/etc. would deal with residents as individuals. Counties wouldn't have as much direct governance over individuals, but would be there to govern the local/city/township/etc. levels within it's borders. State governments would have even less direct dealings with individuals, but would govern the counties within it's borders.
Perhaps you could show us where you found this pile of dog shit. It is not in the constitution. It is not in the federalist or anti federalist papers.
It is not in any of the writtings of the founders so just where do you come up with this idiotic tripe?

Somehow, that all got fucked up.
That never was and was never imagined.

You have a very poor understanding of this. You really should stay out of it, you are embarrassing yourself.
The fucking tenth amendment proves you 100 % wrong. and there are other things. I have read the Constitution but it was years ago, but I remember enough to refute plenty of what you spew along with your unwarranted attempts at insulting people who obviously know more than you.
Have you even read the Constitution ?
T^T


It's okay, Termy. All he wants to do is argue and call people names. Obviously, the US Constitution and Federalist Papers won't call out the workings of State and lower levels of government. And, just to piss him off (because I'm right), he should read The Federalist #46.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 8:02:49 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
I haven't read The Federalist because it does not have the force of law. The only law I recognize is the Constitution and Bill Of Rights. Statutory law to enforce same yes, it sets the penalties and all that and more clearly defines the elements of the crime.

I have not read the Magna Carta or any of that either, it does not govern this country. I know people like RO claim it does matter because it is the basis of some parts of the founding documents, but the bottom line is all that matters is the founding documents. The Magna Carta is for England. And how the fuck those supposedly intelligent people gave up their guns is beyond me. But they did. Well, when they need them, sorry about their luck.

I only have a passing interest in the laws of other countries. Their low murder rates do not impress me, it simply reveals they have less who need to be killed. So they do not need as many killing tools. And they still have them, they just make it as hard to get them as getting a job flying a 787.

And also, their cops have guns. And their cops do not blow off 41 rounds at a guy with a knife, or shoot an old Man in his bed, or tell a Black guy to freeze, and then order him to show his hands and shoot him for moving.

We know the day will come when we need those guns. They don't. Those countries are different. They do not breed criminals like we do. They do not have 30 % of their people on psychotropic drugs. Shit, soon there will be a pill for when your dog dies, and a different one for when your cat dies. And in the side effects will be listed "May cause suicidal tendencies" and these assholes will still let them sell the shit and even advertise it on TV. Yeah, your dog was your best friend and he died, and now you want to kill yourself. Well here are these pills, you'll still kill yourself but we just made a bunch of money on the pills. And that is how business works.

Don't wonder why I am half crazy, wonder why I am only half crazy. I am seriously getting to the point where I wish I did not have the knowledge that I have. I would be much happier ignorant. I see no future anymore. There is too much wrong. I will not open up a business, which I am well capable of running. That is because of the unfriendly climate here. I really wish I had confidence in my ability to learn another language. I would move to Russia or whatever. But I can't see for shit and I can't hear for shit and I can barely walk anymore. It just ain't worth it. I can barely type and read the computer screen, but I am to the point where I can barely do anything else so here I am.

I used to take care of myself and eat healthy and all that, but no more. I see where this world is headed and really, I don't want to go. The best Constitution in the word is trashed. They read everything you write, even Xray your snail mails. You are not allowed to have encryption they can't break but what they do with YOUR money is a big secret and even knowing it could land you in jail, possibly in Cuba. Fuck you. I want no part of this planet anymore. I don't hate this country, but the type of motherfuckers running it has got to go.

T^T

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 8:35:49 PM   
CarpeComa


Posts: 194
Joined: 5/12/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Some laws need to be repealed, but to allow laws to automatically expire is stupid. Do we really want the laws for murder, rape, and treason to expire?
This is why all laws don't have a sundown clause on laws. And when you talk about sundown clause for the constitution that is just crazy.



quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Not rewritten, added to.
Not automatically expiring.
Should, for example, the 13th amendment have automatically expired in the 1880s because maybe we would change our minds about slavery?


These arguments are both absolute poppycock and scarcely stand up to a second's worth of thought. The 13th amendment just codified something that was clearly obvious in the constitution. It only formally got rid of something that had only been tolerated as a political compromise. The 13th expiring would not bring back slavery. As for the rest, any politician that let one of those laws expire on their watch, what do you think would happen to them? Secondly, it isn't like we just have one law, we have many many laws in regards to those kinds of crimes, each of which would be on a separate timer. This is actually part of what is great about the idea; it gives politicians something important to do and posture over, rather than writing more and more dumb feel-good laws & cronyism bills.

Do you have any arguments that have any substance?

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 8:47:35 PM   
BamaD


Posts: 20687
Joined: 2/27/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Some laws need to be repealed, but to allow laws to automatically expire is stupid. Do we really want the laws for murder, rape, and treason to expire?
This is why all laws don't have a sundown clause on laws. And when you talk about sundown clause for the constitution that is just crazy.



quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Not rewritten, added to.
Not automatically expiring.
Should, for example, the 13th amendment have automatically expired in the 1880s because maybe we would change our minds about slavery?


These arguments are both absolute poppycock and scarcely stand up to a second's worth of thought. The 13th amendment just codified something that was clearly obvious in the constitution. It only formally got rid of something that had only been tolerated as a political compromise. The 13th expiring would not bring back slavery. As for the rest, any politician that let one of those laws expire on their watch, what do you think would happen to them? Secondly, it isn't like we just have one law, we have many many laws in regards to those kinds of crimes, each of which would be on a separate timer. This is actually part of what is great about the idea; it gives politicians something important to do and posture over, rather than writing more and more dumb feel-good laws & cronyism bills.

Do you have any arguments that have any substance?

Slavery was constitutional prior to the 13th, even Lincoln said so.
It is better to repeal bad laws than to allow good ones to expire.
Yep right in the middle of WWII the congress should have to stop and renew the laws against murder and rape.
You forget that the big, important ones like that would be on pretty much the same timers.

Every time you renew one you get the chance for more trailers to be added on.

Why would you want to have to renew them? If you think a law might need to expire why pass it in the first place. That is why there was a sundown on the Partriot Act and the guns that look like assault weapons ban.

You want to put sundowns on some laws, fine, but to make it maditory for all law is dumb.

< Message edited by BamaD -- 7/25/2016 8:58:35 PM >


_____________________________

Government ranges from a necessary evil to an intolerable one. Thomas Paine

People don't believe they can defend themselves because they have guns, they have guns because they believe they can defend themselves.

(in reply to CarpeComa)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/25/2016 9:37:07 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline
I disagree. Make them punks work for their $170,000 a year, they got nothing else to do. And all the time people say laws need to be changed, well there's your chance.

A mandatory agenda in the house and senate to renew the most important laws, such as those against murder etc., which are actually almost never enforced. Almost always it is state law that is used against murderers, rapists, thieves and whatever. Federal cases are rare in those crimes. And in Ruby Ridge and Waco, just what the fuck law were they enforcing ? There was no meth lab at that compound in Waco, and as far as I am concerned Weaver did no wrong selling a sawed off shotgun. Back then flare guns would shoot 12 gauge shotgun rounds anyway, and that is way smaller than any sawed off.

Actually this is all a pipe dream anyway. If these motherfuckers worked for us it would be different. The law would be fine tuned every so often. But they work for big business and the way they would fine tune it would be to make their donors more money. Like fine tuning the Monsanto Protection Act.

But still, keeping those assholes busy with shit like this will take time away from them being able to fuck the place up even more.

T^T

(in reply to BamaD)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/27/2016 1:27:09 AM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or
I haven't read The Federalist because it does not have the force of law. The only law I recognize is the Constitution and Bill Of Rights. Statutory law to enforce same yes, it sets the penalties and all that and more clearly defines the elements of the crime.
...
T^T


Termy, you are correct that The Federalist Papers contain no force of law. However, they do set out the rationale for why the US Constitution should be ratified. They put on paper the reasons why the US Constitution was written as it was written, and the Founding Fathers' intent in writing what they wrote. The Anti-Federalist Papers (which is a misnomer because they weren't opposed to a Federal form of government, but they opposed the Constitution as it was written) were warnings about what could happen if the Constitution was ratified as it was written. The Anti's were a big part of why the "Bill of Rights" was passed.

I'm a believer in original intent. I think the Constitution should be interpreted the way it was intended by the writers. The Federalist Papers shine a light on the FF's thinking and intentions.

As far as the Magna Carta and any other similar texts go, reading them might help understand what our Founders were thinking when they wrote our Constitution. Hell, I believe the Declaration of Independence is as important as our Constitution, even though it carries no force of law.

The US needs to decide what the proper role the government is. Once the role is defined, then we can go about limiting it, or freeing it.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire - 7/27/2016 9:15:13 PM   
Termyn8or


Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarpeComa


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Some laws need to be repealed, but to allow laws to automatically expire is stupid. Do we really want the laws for murder, rape, and treason to expire?
This is why all laws don't have a sundown clause on laws. And when you talk about sundown clause for the constitution that is just crazy.



quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
Not rewritten, added to.
Not automatically expiring.
Should, for example, the 13th amendment have automatically expired in the 1880s because maybe we would change our minds about slavery?


These arguments are both absolute poppycock and scarcely stand up to a second's worth of thought. The 13th amendment just codified something that was clearly obvious in the constitution. It only formally got rid of something that had only been tolerated as a political compromise. The 13th expiring would not bring back slavery. As for the rest, any politician that let one of those laws expire on their watch, what do you think would happen to them? Secondly, it isn't like we just have one law, we have many many laws in regards to those kinds of crimes, each of which would be on a separate timer. This is actually part of what is great about the idea; it gives politicians something important to do and posture over, rather than writing more and more dumb feel-good laws & cronyism bills.

Do you have any arguments that have any substance?


A regular law is different than an amendment. Until the US went bankrupt and declared a state of emergency, it was not possible under the Constitution for them to regulate what you took into your own body. There was cocaine in Coca Cola, and you could buy paragoric at local drugstores without a prescription. They believed, rightfully, that these things were outside the government's scope of power as per the Constitution.

That is why prohibition was an amendment. If it simply had been legislated someone would have sued, took it to the supreme court and it would have been struck down in a heartbeat.

Remember that the Constitution clearly was intended to define and limit the power of the federal government. All founding documents and writings by the founders indicate that. While they wanted a strong government, they did not want it stepping on the toes of the people. The idea was to enforce the Constitution.

They are enabled to write laws against murder and theft because according to the Constitution, no person should be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process. Those laws ARE pursuant to the Constitution, and would have to be renewed every so many years. If the legislatures failed to do so railroad them the fuck out.

What do we pay them for ? To work an average of about ten hours a week and use the rest of the time to raise campaign money to get reelected ? Because that is pretty much what they do.

Anyway, I never said amendments should expire. Legislation. What's more that would mean the law gets tweaked every so often. And we would not have laws against French kissing, sodomy. (which some southern state started enforcing again, entrapping people only a few years ago)

Every day, they should have a stack of expiring laws on their desk to go through and decide which ones to renew, amend, or let lapse. EVERY LAW comes around sooner or later.

They got the time to generate bills that are over a thousand pages, give them less time for that bullshit. You know Ron Paul introduced a bill that if passed would require X days between the finalization of a bill and the vote so they could at east read the thing. It did not pass so it never got to the President's desk. Who votes against something like that ? The only ones I can think of are those who want to slip something in without the other legislators noticing. That is not how lawmaking is supposed to be. Ad that bitch with the "We have to pass it to see what's in it" bullshit should have been tarred and feathered. (I hear that was often fatal and still stand by that statement)

T^T

(in reply to CarpeComa)
Profile   Post #: 56
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Outdated Laws Should Expire Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109