This is our cultural baggage. A once overwhelmingly rural people, without much in the way of police forces, or a professional military, surrounded by potential enemies (some of whom had a lot of lucrative land), and in some internal areas a great fear of domestic insurrection, we included the right to have guns alongside the right to speak freely, the right to due process, and other, what we in the modern west would consider, basic human rights. There was not a lot of novelty to most of these rights. Contrary to the general American belief that we were the first to ensure these rights, most of them were lifted from the laws of the land most of us called the mother country - the Kingdom of Great Britain. The Bill of Rights was not an ideological revolution, but an evolution of well established laws that many Americans were familiar with.
And then there is popular historical revisionism which states that the Bill of Rights is some genius limitation on the powers of government that saves us from tyranny. It's just so obvious that they are necessary. But James Madison and Alexander Hamilton did not think so. In fact, they thought inclusion of enumerated rights was dangerous. That act in itself might limit our rights---government might one day declare that your rights emanate from this document, the one you are asserting is not in the text, and only the government can create rights.
Plus, the bill of rights was simply ignored when deemed expedient. Suppression of abolitionist mail. The right of due process denied under the Fugitive Slave Act, and so on. But revisionism states that this our defense against the overreach of government. Hardly. Madison had it right when he called it a mere scrap of paper giving the illusion of protection.
But I ramble. The point is that now the self-proclaimed defenders of our rights are these gun-toting jackalopes. The open carry idiots who walk down our streets with assault rifles hoping for an incident with the law. The fact is is that this right is not relevant or necessary for the bulk of now urbanized America with no need to take native lands, suppress slave revolts, police themselves, or defend against tyrannical threats.
Jeff, there's a lot of way off in there.
The Bill of Rights was not revolutionary, that is correct. And it has been ignored when expedient, that is also correct. But almost everything else you have stated is wrong.
Last edited by captainpreppy (2014-10-09 18:18:19)
"Asshat" - new one to me. I might submit it to the OED.
How long have you been on the internet Dud?
Man goes into store wanting a grenadine tie, despite not really knowing what one is. He asks the sales force and finds them as ignorant as he is. There is nothing left to do in this idiotic quest but to ask the internet. The clueless Quetzal, who is uncomfortable with malls, preferring flea markets, tell his dubious Nordstom tale about incredibly ignorant salesmen, and is called on it and then we then get mumbo jumbo about the term "tie clasp."
http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/forum/showthread.php?191177-Is-this-a-grenadine-tie
Last edited by chatsworth osborne jr. (2014-10-13 16:55:03)
OH! IT HURTS!
I have a pair of grenadine double monks that are quite beautiful. Does anyone know if they fit me?
Reindeer Grenadine?
/\ nice work Expando!
^ phenomenal. Everyone generate a card by next Monday and it's game on.
Let us not neglect the ever golden:
'attempts to prove point with photo of Cary Grant'
'throws a hissy fit at the mere mention of notch lapel dinner jacket'
'upset at finding near invisible flaw in shoes sold as seconds'
'black suit prompts mention of waiter'
'disputes over the nature of a fondly imagined notion of gentlemanliness'
'wedding party plan to dress like slobs but I know better - how to tell them?'
And...
Problem wearing good clothes with my fantastic physique
Problem wearing good clothes with my fantastic handgun
fitment
methinks
Last edited by Popeye Doyle (2014-10-15 08:06:39)
How did you work out that I am a psychotherapist? Is it THAT obvious? C'mon!