This morning I weighed 222.2 pounds.
Apparently I really am dieting. I'm hungry, I still eat too much
sometimes, but things are getting better. (I started dieting two
weeks ago, at 225.)
Now I would like to turn to a serious
topic. Here are the first two amendments to our constitution:
Amendment
1
Congress
shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
of
the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition
the
Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment
2
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.
Note
that the first amendment says “no law” regarding freedom of
speech. But we have laws that regulate speech. In fact, we have
hundreds. We may have started with the observation that it should be
illegal to shout “Fire” in a crowded theater.
Laws
regarding what this amendment says shall be “no law” have
multiplied. Today we have an
extreme case: the Patriot Act makes it legal to charge a person with
a crime and forbid them from discussing the charge with anyone,
except “in person” with
their
lawyer (not by email or phone, etc.). Many of the laws restricting
free speech make common sense. Some
seemed good at the time. They
are there by the hundreds.
The
second amendment does not specify “no law” regarding the bearing
of arms, but says those rights must not be infringed. Common sense
has eaten into this amendment as well. For example, our rights to
bear a machine gun on a passenger airplane have been sensibly
infringed.
Here's
my plea: why can't we turn common sense loose on the second amendment
as much as we've done to the first? Just as “no law” means “lots
of law”, let “shall not be infringed” mean “shall be sensibly
infringed”.
Bring
it on.
No comments:
Post a Comment