ofrm1 said:
If you're talking about vague expressions of freedom, like freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, petition, etc. Then yes. However, those are expressions that everyone realizes in modern society. So what do you do when someone wants to buy a gun with a 100 round magazine? The constitution has nothing to say about it because it didn't exist when it was written. What do you do when someone wants to listen in on a phone call? Phones didn't exist then. I could go on and on. Having an old, archaic document that merely expresses basic freedoms does nothing to help the citizens of the nation because those freedoms don't mean anything if they aren't detailed and precise. The way to solve these problems is the same way that other countries with constitutions solves them; create a new draft of the constitution and ratify it. Instead of taking a 200 year-old quilt and constantly patching the holes which keep getting larger and larger, just make a whole new quilt and be done with it. Also, it's not as if those expressions of freedom were new or original during the late 18th century. They're lifted almost wholesale from Hobbes, Locke, and to a lesser extent, Rousseau. So it's not as if these rights came from the framers to begin with. |
But like big jon said in a post before, who is going to write this new constitution? the people that are already infringing on our basic freedoms right now? I surely hope not as I would not want to live in this country then 
. Anyway like I said new laws should be made as technology advances.
Also 100 round magazines? I don't think anybody makes those for civilian use. Could be wrong though,
