Our newly founded nation is made up of a large number of individuals who have suffered through a long, difficult and unfair oppression. After wars, loses, and hardships we have now risen from the ashes and are ready to dust ourselves off; ready to enjoy our rightfully earned freedoms. It seems, however, that many influential people such as the respectable Alexander Hamilton are arguing to omit the ability to secure and shelter these freedoms in the form of a Bill of Rights. I consider this a particularly reckless move on behalf of our country. John Smilie, has voiced that without the establishment of a Bill of Rights, our future leaders will have no set limitations to prevent tyranny. How will the people know when their rights are being abused. Furthermore, what legitimate document will serve as evidence when the people accuse the government of overstepping its boundaries. Without a Bill of Rights, …show more content…
This means, for example, that the only reason we have freedom of speech is because the government is choosing to allow us the right. It is not difficult to understand why a previously oppressed people would immediately react to such a strong opinion, but I wish to soothe any fears. The proposed Bill of Rights will not be a set of permissions. Instead, it will be more of a clear and straight to the point definition of basic freedoms we demand our government to respect. As time passes, we will be able to rest easy knowing that we have documentation to fall back on in case any threat to our rights arises. This document will secure and shelter what is rightfully ours, so there is no need to see it as something that will give more power to the government. I don’t mean any offense to the many who side with the opposition; I merely want to clear up this
The Bill of Rights was crafted in 1791 by James Madison. It was put in place to protect the rights of all people within the borders of the United States when it is applied by the government. It is a very important document that means a lot in the hearts of Americans.
The United States Bill of Rights came into being as a result of a promise made by the Fathers of Confederation to the states during the struggle for ratification of the Constitution in 1787-88. A great number of the states made as a condition for their ratification, the addition of amendments, which would guarantee citizens protection of their rights against the central government. Thus, we have a rather interesting situation in which the entrenchment of a bill of rights in the American Constitution was done by the virtual demand of the states, they themselves fearing a central government which was not legally constrained and restricted as far as its powers were concerned.
The question raised in the title of this paper is: Are the Bill of Rights, written well over 200 years ago, still relevant today? Of course, they are and probably even more so. To illustrate this fact, we will examine each of the ten amendments, rewrite each one using common everyday language of today, and if possible discuss why this was important in 1791 and why we may or may not need this document in writing today. In restating each amendment, I will try to write it as if it is a brand new document, which is a stretch to say the least. Without the struggle of the colonies through war and abuse by the English Monarchy, would one have the foresight to see how a government may take for granted the rights of its citizenry?
Throughout time there have been many amendments to the United States Constitution. Some have had little to no effect on the population. One amendment that this writer will take a look at is the Fourteenth Amendment. The wording of the amendment has been debated here recently but bottom line it abolished slavery. This amendment also made an attempt to equalize everyone that is born here in America or naturalized. The ripple effect of this change to the constitution is still being felt today. It is hard to imagine living in a world where the African American community was not considered equal to the white man. A ground breaking distinction in the language written out in the document was that of it applying on the federal level as well as the state jurisdiction. This is especially important as we see the civil union marriages have conflict
Therefore Hamilton states that bills of rights “have no application to constitutions professedly founded upon the power of the people,” and that under the constitution “the people surrender nothing, and as they retain everything of the state constitutions do not contain one either. He believes that the Constitution, as it is, effectively includes a bill of rights. The constitution contained various provisions in favor of particular privileges and rights. Provisions such as the power to impeach, writ of habeas corpus, the allowance for no bill of attainder or ex post facto law, no granting of title of nobility, trials that shall be by a jury in the state in which the crime was committed, and that punishment for treason will not extend to family members of the person convicted of that crime. To Hamilton, these privileges and rights amount to a bill of rights.
For hundreds of years Americans have been growing up with the notion that it is a right to own a gun. Since the creation of the second amendment, people all over the United States have been able to guns for private use. Guns operated by the public are said to have a variety of uses such as, being able to protect oneself if conflict arises, grants the ability to put food on the table, and are used in competitions shooting targets against other people. But for many people guns have been seen as the root of all evil. Anti-gun users think that guns cause a variety of unexpected and innocent deaths. They also think that there are not enough laws in place that allow just about anyone to purchase a gun. The question of should guns be legal to all citizens has plagued our society. Do you think it is morally right for anyone to arm themselves and use it when they deem it to be necessary? Or do you think that the 2rd amendment seem unnecessary and outdated law that needs to be rewritten? These questions are just two of many that have thrown back and forth between pro-gun and anti-gun users.
The first amendment is the cornerstone of our American society founded years ago by our forefathers. Without the first amendment many ideas, beliefs, and groups could not exist today. The first amendment guaranteed the people of the United States the freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, and freedom of petition. Although the first amendment guarantees us, Americans the freedom of speech, we cannot use it to cause others harm. This amendment has helped shaped Americans into what we are today, because of our right to assemble, speak freely, and worship as we please.
One of the most important amendments in the United States Constitution and which is also part of the Bill of Rights is the Fourth amendment. The Fourth Amendment protects people from being searched or arrested by police officers or any law enforcement without a reason. An officer may confront you and ask to search your house but if they don’t have a search warrant, they cannot legally pursue it without good reason and permission from a judge. Now what happens when a person is being arrested? Does the police or any law enforcement need a search warrant? The answer to that question would have to be no. This is where “Search incident to arrest” comes into play. Search incident to arrest (SITA), which could also be called the Chimel rule, is a
The First Amendment is what we chose because it covers good areas (topics) that are occurring in the world on a daily basis. Many people like the items that The First Amendment covers, and some people don't like them. Either way there are many other amendments that have been ratified by the two-thirds of the House and Senate. There are ten amendments in the constitution, but there are 17 other amendments that aren't in the constitution. Therefore, in total there are 27 amendments.
In 1791, the Bill of Rights, consisting of 10 amendments, was ratified into the constitution. The document’s purpose was to spell out the liberties of the people that the government could not infringe upon. Considered necessary by many at the time of its development, the Bill of Rights became the cause for a huge debate between two different factions: The Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. The Federalists were those who thought that there should be a new Union created with a strong centralized government and individual regional governments. They felt that it was not necessary for there to be a bill of rights because it was implied that those rights the Constitution did not specifically state would be handed down to the states. On the other hand, the Anti-Federalists were opposed to such a form of government on the grounds that the Constitution, in which it was outlined, lacked clarity in the protections of the individuals. The Anti-Federalists—whose memory of British oppression was still fresh in their minds—wanted certain rights and guarantees that were to be apart of the constitution (Glasser 1991). A clear demonstration of the Anti-Federalist attitude was performed by Samuel Bryan, who published a series of essays named the ‘Cenitnal Essays,’ which “assailed the sweeping power of the central government, the usurpation of state sovereignty, and the absence of a bill of rights guaranteeing individual liberties such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion (Bran 1986).” Of course, the freedoms stated above are a portion and not the whole of The Bill of Rights. Ultimately, The Bill of Rights was adopted to appease the Anti-Federalists, whose support was necessary to ratify the constitution, and who believed that without the liberties granted therein, the new constitution—that they thought was vague and granted too much power to the central government—would give way to an elite tyrannical government.
Since the early history of our country, the protection of basic freedoms has been very important to Americans. The American voice on freedom has been shaped throughout history. The Bill of Rights was originally drawn up in June, 1789. On December 15th, 1791, the Bill of Rights were ratified and added to the United States Constitution. James Madison said that a bill of rights was good for the “tranquility of the public mind, and the stability of the government” (Burgar, Michael, 2002). Free speech and free press were most important to the drafters of the Bill of Ri...
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” is stated in the United States Constitution as the Second Amendment. Several Americans wish to rid of guns from citizens, disobeying and disrespecting the Constitution. I shot my first gun when I was young and have always been surrounded by them. My neighbor does not leave the house without carrying one, nor does my eighteen year old friend. Never once have I felt unsafe or uneasy knowing that there was a gun close to me. The right to bare arms has become a popular local battle in which some people want to reduce the freedom of one owning firearms while others wish for the
We live in the 21st century, where most Americans mind their own business but take for granted our God given rights. Not only God given rights but also those established by our founding forefathers. This paper will illustrate and depict the importance of the original problems faced when adopting the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It will discuss the importance of the first amendment, the due process of the 4th, 5th, 6th, and the 8th amendments. Last but not least the importance of what is known as the “second Bill of Rights” (14th amendment).
[4] Hickok, Eugene Jr., ed. The Bill of Rights: Original Meaning and Current Understanding. Virginia: University Press of Virginia, 1991
When the dogmatic kings of 17th century Europe started to abuse their own people’s rights and persecute the others, the people were forced to abscond. However, where would these people go, wherever they went in Europe they were persecuted. These people were in desperate need of freedom and that is exactly what they found in the New World. On the soil of America, the Founding Fathers constructed a Constitution and a democratic government so that no one else’s rights would be repressed. The Constitution had attached to it the Bill of Rights, which contained ten amendments that all protected the rights of Americans, from the freedom of press to the right to a fair and speedy trial. These rights were in turn protected by civil liberties or “… guarantees of the safety of persons, opinions, and property from the arbitrary acts of government” (McClenaghan 772). Under this new government, a democratic nation wa...