The following is a proposed Amendment to the US Constitution. It's an amplification of an idea proposed in an essay in The Libertarian Enterprise, penned by L Neil Smith.
Proposed: Amendment XXVIII
Whereas: Legislators and other elected and appointed officials, and law enforcement personnel no longer see a need to pay any heed to the limits placed 'pon them by the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Whereas: Legislators and other elected and appointed officials, and law enforcement personnel no longer see any need be truthful in the performance of their jobs.
Be it resolved that, to remind these hired hands of their proper place in society, it becomes necessary for Americans to take control of their local, state and federal civil servants and require that dereliction in their jobs will no longer be tolerated.
Toward this end, we propose the following Amendment to the US Constitution.
Section 1. Any legislative action that is not specifically authorized by the Constitution of the United States shall be considered null and void.
Section 2. Any legislative action that violates any article of the Bill of Rights shall be considered null and void.
Section 3. Any elected official who submits, sponsors, votes for or signs any Bill that violates either Section 1 or Section 2 shall be guilty of committing a felony.
Section 4. Any elected official who communicates a falsehood while acting within his Office, or who violates his Oath of Office shall be guilty of committing a felony.
Section 5. The punishment to be imposed upon those convicted of any of the felonies enumerated above shall be death by public hanging.
Section 6. Congress shall screed all current laws against the wording of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights, and repeal all laws, directives and regulations found to be out of concert with these documents.
Section 6. Only the wording of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights themselves shall determine the legality of any proposed legislation.
Section 7. Amendments shall be adopted by means specified in the Constitution of the United States.
I don't think very many actual hangings will result from the enactment of this Amendment; government officials and employees want nothing more than to reach retirement and true stagnation. I suspect that the Amendment means Congress will react to it by doing nothing. This, of course, is the best of all possible worlds.
People should not be afraid of their governments; governments should be afraid of the people.
Warm regards,
Col. Hogan
Stalag California
9 comments:
It's good in theory, holding the bastards accountable, but someone actually has to do it and the citizenry by and large won't do it.
You forgot to put down that there will be no gray areas. It either is or it ain't.
I opt for an alternative to public hangings; the old drawn and quartered and perhaps borrow the Budweiser Kliedsdale team. They could do this during half time at the next Super Bowl instead of hearing some over the hill rock star.
MK,
Clearly this wouldn't be easy to do. Not only are the government indoctrinated public madly in love with their sugar daddies, as well as the system that enslaves them, but very afraid of conflict. Mercy is more important that justice.
I only echo and amplify Mr Smith's suggestion to raise the notion that we are being lied to by government officials many times a day, every single day, and the wonderful documents that would've and could've given us a fully free society based on justice rather than privilege is being systematically dismantled by the unscrupulous individuals who grasp at power like a drug addict grasping for his heroine kit.
I'm using a union tactic of asking for more than I think I'll get, partly to get folks' attention, and partly to emphasize the degree of their crimes.
Steve,
As you know, I don't think in shades of gray regarding political philosophy. A true statement is true, or it's a lie. A man stands for liberty, or he's for a dictatorship.
TF,
Using a bit of hyperbole to emphasize my point.
The federal government has been nipping away at freedom since before the ink dried on the Bill of Rights. The more voices standing in opposition to this trend--loudly and clearly--the more likely the liberty we can remember from history can begin to be repaired.
On the other hand, it's clear that this Amendment, if somehow ratified, would result in sensible, manageable government.
I would love to hear your views on our Supreme Court Justices! :-)
Won't you please indulge me?
Thanks!
Anonymous,
The Supremes seem buyable because they almost always opine in accordance with the government. They've ratified conscription--despite the fact that it's clearly slavery. They've ratified many gun controls and many infringements on freedom of speech.
Homeland Security and the Patriot Act are shot through with unConstitutional infringements of our rights, as is the apparati of the War on Drugs. The Supremes have done nothing to stop these atrocities.
The big problem seems to be that the Supremes rely on precedents set by bought-and-paid-for Courts from the past--they don't actually seem to look at the Constitution at all. And, in today's political climate, no one will be nominated to the Supreme Court that will.
Someday, somebody in Washington DC has to pause and actually read the documents and pay attention to what they say.
I quite like your proposed amendment. Actually, I was rather surprised at how many of your posts on this blog I agree with.
Post a Comment