Bill Of Rights Amendment
April 24, 2018 at 7:36 p.m.
Editor, Times-Union:
In a recent New York Times editorial, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote of the "need" to simply repeal the Second Amendment in order to remove any legal barriers that hinder gun control legislation. If such a move were to come to fruition, America would be opening the door for the removal of the rest of the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th Amendments, etc. Besides the constituency for the removal of the Second Amendment, which adheres to such remarks as the following:
• “The Second Amendment is just words humans made up at a certain moment in history when they felt right.”
• “outdated relic from the 18th century.”
We have other constituencies who would like to see the legal barriers that were built by freedom of speech and the press removed in order to enact various forms of censorship. That constituency firmly backs the statement below:
• “We need to make it clear: You have the right to say what doesn't upset people.”
Then there is the constituencies that would like to remove the legal barrier of freedom of religion from the First Amendment. One would then find oneself as either a second- or third-tier minority faith under the rule of an official state-sanctioned church/religion or a regime similar in the approach that North Korean and China take in regard to religion.
There are then constituencies for the removal of legal protections found in the Fourth through Eighth Amendments and finally the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments.
The lengthy amendment process to the Constitution in Article V is not a foolproof method for relying on in regard to the protection of the Bill of Rights and other freedom amendments. Therefore, an additional solution to protecting all of these natural and constitutional rights would be the following.
1. Adding the following language to the Second Amendment, which I have indicated in bold letters below:
A well-regulated and organized volunteer militia, being necessary to the security of a free state and free people shall be maintained. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon by undue regulations, the repeal of this amendment or the disarmament of the civilian population.
2. Adding the following language, which I have indicated in bold letters, to Ninth Amendment in order to protect the original and expanded Bill of Rights:
The enumeration in the Constitution, Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments of certain natural and constitutional rights beyond repeal by amendment, convention or otherwise, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people now and in generations yet to follow.
Please contact your elected officials to enact these crucial steps in protecting our basic freedoms. An additional step in protecting these rights will follow shortly in the letters to the editor column.
Alexander Houze
Leesburg
Editor, Times-Union:
In a recent New York Times editorial, former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens wrote of the "need" to simply repeal the Second Amendment in order to remove any legal barriers that hinder gun control legislation. If such a move were to come to fruition, America would be opening the door for the removal of the rest of the Bill of Rights and the 13th, 14th, 15th, 19th Amendments, etc. Besides the constituency for the removal of the Second Amendment, which adheres to such remarks as the following:
• “The Second Amendment is just words humans made up at a certain moment in history when they felt right.”
• “outdated relic from the 18th century.”
We have other constituencies who would like to see the legal barriers that were built by freedom of speech and the press removed in order to enact various forms of censorship. That constituency firmly backs the statement below:
• “We need to make it clear: You have the right to say what doesn't upset people.”
Then there is the constituencies that would like to remove the legal barrier of freedom of religion from the First Amendment. One would then find oneself as either a second- or third-tier minority faith under the rule of an official state-sanctioned church/religion or a regime similar in the approach that North Korean and China take in regard to religion.
There are then constituencies for the removal of legal protections found in the Fourth through Eighth Amendments and finally the 13th, 14th, 15th and 19th Amendments.
The lengthy amendment process to the Constitution in Article V is not a foolproof method for relying on in regard to the protection of the Bill of Rights and other freedom amendments. Therefore, an additional solution to protecting all of these natural and constitutional rights would be the following.
1. Adding the following language to the Second Amendment, which I have indicated in bold letters below:
A well-regulated and organized volunteer militia, being necessary to the security of a free state and free people shall be maintained. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed upon by undue regulations, the repeal of this amendment or the disarmament of the civilian population.
2. Adding the following language, which I have indicated in bold letters, to Ninth Amendment in order to protect the original and expanded Bill of Rights:
The enumeration in the Constitution, Bill of Rights and subsequent amendments of certain natural and constitutional rights beyond repeal by amendment, convention or otherwise, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people now and in generations yet to follow.
Please contact your elected officials to enact these crucial steps in protecting our basic freedoms. An additional step in protecting these rights will follow shortly in the letters to the editor column.
Alexander Houze
Leesburg