i believe that the right to bear arms is putting Americans in asticky situation. it's like letting America be an armed nation. it also brings up situations like the militia supporting the Tea Party. it's like we're an armed nation. it gives citizens the ablitlity to keep a gun. it's like an okay to go and shoot someone, or at least giving them the resources to. i think this amendment should be rewritten. The constitution is what our government is based on and not by socialists or communism. The GOP should recognize what the Constitution says. If they don't agree with what the Consitution sayd, they should obviously try to change it.
Jessica, The problem is it is very difficult to change the Constitution. The amendment process requires majorities in both Houses as well as all of the states must ratify changes. There are only 27 amendments in over 200 years of our history. The courts are the next best thing to ratification. They can interpret the Constitution and in some cases, rule that certain changes take place. The 2nd Amendment (the right to bear arms) is almost seen as sacred by many Americans despite many instances of gun violence that are seen on a yearly basis. The United States with its free gun policy (i.e. just about anyone can get ahold of a gun) is seen as an oddity by most nations around the world. It will be hard to change our gun policies or amend the Constitution.
Viridiana S. Period 2 I don't understand why both Democrats and Republicans want to either add on to the Constitution, or remove from it. The Republicans want to repeal the 14th Amendment, while Democrats want to propose ideas such as congressional succession in a natural disaster. I necessarily don't think there's anything wrong with the Constitution, there's something wrong with "revising" it in order to get one political party's views across. I strognly agree that the Constitution should be followed, as is.
I do not agree with Paul Broun's idea of editing the Constitution. The whole point of making the Constitution was for it to be follwed, so why are they trying to add Amendments to it? If that was going to happen, it should've happened since the beginning. The whole idea of the Amendment 14, to me sounds ridiculous.
I extremely do not agree with Paul Broun's ideal to a certain extent. I don't agree that they should edit the Constitutuion just because someone took advantage of the Amendment. Now I don't agree that people from another country just come here and plan to have a baby unless they are willing to stay. Another thing is that I agree that there should be taxes, even though they are a real drag, because it helps the government function on creating buildings, roads, etc.
I also disagree with Paul Broun's idea. I mean why add or take things off. They should just let it be the way it is created. Hasn't the constitution been followed for so many years. Why are they both parties doing this. It is just creating more issues which make people more angry and crate a whole mess. I think that they should just keep it the way it is.
Maricruz M P3 I think the Second Amendment of the U.S. constitution was a mistake since its creation. In my opinion only the military has the right to bear arms and not citizens. This amendment has caused much damage because all the weapons used by criminals in Mexico come from the United States. To end all the violence in the world all weapons should be destroyed and end with the loss of people victimized by firearms. However this will never end, if such laws exist. I’m 100% opposed to these laws that only harm to humans. When government gives someone a weapon that is not enough trained are giving the opportunity to go and misuse of the firearm, or maybe to give are the opportunity to go shooting at an innocent person.
I also disagree with Paul Broun's idea of editing the Constitution. I mean if the constitution was made it was mede for a reason not so that i could be change and be sean as a joke and, i just think that the constitution is perferct how it is know.
maggie vidales per.3 I so disagree with Paul Bron's that whats to edit the Constitution.I think are founding father wrote it for a reason.I think they shoulding change it for what so it could be all crazy.I belive it is well writing already.
Jessica M. P. 2
ReplyDeletei believe that the right to bear arms is putting Americans in asticky situation. it's like letting America be an armed nation. it also brings up situations like the militia supporting the Tea Party. it's like we're an armed nation. it gives citizens the ablitlity to keep a gun. it's like an okay to go and shoot someone, or at least giving them the resources to. i think this amendment should be rewritten. The constitution is what our government is based on and not by socialists or communism. The GOP should recognize what the Constitution says. If they don't agree with what the Consitution sayd, they should obviously try to change it.
Jessica,
ReplyDeleteThe problem is it is very difficult to change the Constitution. The amendment process requires majorities in both Houses as well as all of the states must ratify changes. There are only 27 amendments in over 200 years of our history. The courts are the next best thing to ratification. They can interpret the Constitution and in some cases, rule that certain changes take place. The 2nd Amendment (the right to bear arms) is almost seen as sacred by many Americans despite many instances of gun violence that are seen on a yearly basis. The United States with its free gun policy (i.e. just about anyone can get ahold of a gun) is seen as an oddity by most nations around the world. It will be hard to change our gun policies or amend the Constitution.
What pages do we read tonight??
ReplyDeleteViridiana S. Period 2
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why both Democrats and Republicans want to either add on to the Constitution, or remove from it. The Republicans want to repeal the 14th Amendment, while Democrats want to propose ideas such as congressional succession in a natural disaster. I necessarily don't think there's anything wrong with the Constitution, there's something wrong with "revising" it in order to get one political party's views across. I strognly agree that the Constitution should be followed, as is.
Jackie Alcala, Period 5
ReplyDeleteI do not agree with Paul Broun's idea of editing the Constitution. The whole point of making the Constitution was for it to be follwed, so why are they trying to add Amendments to it? If that was going to happen, it should've happened since the beginning. The whole idea of the Amendment 14, to me sounds ridiculous.
Manuel Z. Per. 3
ReplyDeleteI extremely do not agree with Paul Broun's ideal to a certain extent. I don't agree that they should edit the Constitutuion just because someone took advantage of the Amendment. Now I don't agree that people from another country just come here and plan to have a baby unless they are willing to stay. Another thing is that I agree that there should be taxes, even though they are a real drag, because it helps the government function on creating buildings, roads, etc.
Ana V. Period 3
ReplyDeleteI also disagree with Paul Broun's idea. I mean why add or take things off. They should just let it be the way it is created. Hasn't the constitution been followed for so many years. Why are they both parties doing this. It is just creating more issues which make people more angry and crate a whole mess. I think that they should just keep it the way it is.
Maricruz M P3
ReplyDeleteI think the Second Amendment of the U.S. constitution was a mistake since its creation. In my opinion only the military has the right to bear arms and not citizens. This amendment has caused much damage because all the weapons used by criminals in Mexico come from the United States. To end all the violence in the world all weapons should be destroyed and end with the loss of people victimized by firearms. However this will never end, if such laws exist. I’m 100% opposed to these laws that only harm to humans. When government gives someone a weapon that is not enough trained are giving the opportunity to go and misuse of the firearm, or maybe to give are the opportunity to go shooting at an innocent person.
Some great entries. This is what the blog is all about!!! Thanks for your thoughts on this complicated topic, AP students...
ReplyDeleteElizabeth Medina P.3
ReplyDeleteI also disagree with Paul Broun's idea of editing the Constitution. I mean if the constitution was made it was mede for a reason not so that i could be change and be sean as a joke and, i just think that the constitution is perferct how it is know.
maggie vidales per.3
ReplyDeleteI so disagree with Paul Bron's that whats to edit the Constitution.I think are founding father wrote it for a reason.I think they shoulding change it for what so it could be all crazy.I belive it is well writing already.