Our 'Nation's' Constitution

 

 

CONSTITUTION

Economic Stability

Good Foreign Relations

Strong Infrastructure

Strong Defense

Efficient use of Natural Resources

Strong National Treasure

Strong focus on TRUTH, LIBERTY, and JUSTICE

REASON WILL PREVAIL

Our countries laws are created by every leader, and enforced by the military and police forces spread throughout the nation.

Bill Of Rights



1. Freedom of Speech

2. Freedom of Religion

3. Freedom of Petition

4. Right to keep and bear arms

5. Right to a speedy trial

6. Right to witnesses

7. Excessive bail and cruel punishment

8. Right to own and bear a moose



 

Constitution

When our group created our Constitution and Bill of Rights we took many things into consideration.One of the first things we looked as was what will be important to our country. That is where we decided that freedom is one of the major things we wanted to focus on. We also wanted our country to be economically stable, have good foreign relations, and a strong national defense. We also looked at what basic right we felt every person should have. That is where we came up with our Bill of rights.

What Constitutes Us?

When you think of the Constitution or read the words that were so carefully chosen by our founding fathers it makes you ponder the ideologies of the time and realize how different everything was and will continue to be in every passing day,week,decade, or century. Change is the natural process of life as well as growth. Considering we physically and mentally change and grow daily you wonder how the Constitution as well as the Declaration of independence have remained so vital, profound, and highly prolific even to this day. Economic stability, strong foreign relations, and a strong infrastructure are necessity for all countries and nations. A countries Bill of Rights and amendments Freedom of speech, Freedom of religion, freedom to petition have all spawned from basic human needs and rights for the safest and best possible existence and have allowed us to protest now without being lynched and when wrongfully accused of a crime to act on due process and fight for truth, justice and liberty. When it comes down to what truly constitutes us it seems to me that it is and always will be Freedom.

CONSTITUTION

Economic Stability

Good Foreign Relations

Strong Infrastructure

Strong Defense

Efficient use of Natural Resources

Strong National Treasure

Strong focus on TRUTH, LIBERTY, and JUSTICE

REASON WILL PREVAIL

Bill Of Rights



1. Freedom of Speech

2. Freedom of Religion

3. Freedom of Petition

4. Right to keep and bear arms

5. Right to a speedy trial

6. Right to witnesses

7. Excessive bail and cruel punishment

8. Right to own and bear a moose



Gun Policies

I am personally for the (responsible) carrying of firearms in public as long as the person wielding the weapon is trained and safe. As long as the person is of an age to understand exactly what they have, and how easy it is to even accidentally kill someone with a gun, has undergone intensive safety courses, and has obtained a license to own a gun and to carry a concealed weapon, I say they should be allowed to. Lethal force on the other hand should only be used in the most dire of situations. If you have a gun in your home and somebody tries to break in, as long as they have a weapon or are successfully about to get away with something of yours I say you should be able to shoot that person to injure, but not kill. I have the same views for public attacks as well. If there is no other way around using lethal force, then you have to do what you have to do, but the preservation of life should be the very highest priority.

Gun Policy

California probably has the strictest gun laws out of all 50 states. I work in a gun store so I am quite familiar with these laws and as you can guess I feel CA gun laws are too strict. While these laws were made to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people, I feel they don't do that. The people we should be worried about are not getting their guns through a gun store like most responsible gun owners do. They are buying them for people off the streets. I do agree with the laws that you have to pass a back ground check before purchasing a gun. This does help to eliminate any potential problems. I also agree that you must pass a safe handling test and written test to demonstrate you know how to properly use and handle a gun. With less and less police officers around to patrol cities I feel much safer knowing I don't have to rely on waiting for the cops to show up to protect me. I think more people should be prepared to protect themselves. I feel CA is too strict when it comes to distributing Concealed Carry Permits. Yes it is great that I can protect myself in my home but for me I don't spend much time at home. Most of the time I am out and about which would require me to have a Concealed Carry Permit to have my gun with me at all times. People who pursue their CCW Permits go through hours and hours of classroom and hands on training. By the end of their training they are highly proficient in safe gun handling and how to handle certain situations. But many people who go through these courses will be unable to get their permits because many counties refuse to issue them or extremely limit the quantity they give out. I feel much safe knowing that someone in the bank line next to me may be carrying concealed in the event of a hostile robbery. As far as when it is appropriate to use deadly force, I have to mostly agree with Ca Penal Code Sec. 197 which states the following:


197.  Homicide is also justifiable when committed by any person in any of the following cases:
   1. When resisting any attempt to murder any person, or to commit a felony, or to do some great bodily injury upon any person; or,
   2. When committed in defense of habitation, property, or person, against one who manifestly intends or endeavors, by violence or surprise, to commit a felony, or against one who manifestly intends and endeavors, in a violent, riotous or tumultuous manner, to enter the habitation of another for the purpose of offering violence to any person therein; or,
   3. When committed in the lawful defense of such person, or of a wife or husband, parent, child, master, mistress, or servant of such person, when there is reasonable ground to apprehend a design to commit a felony or to do some great bodily injury, and imminent danger of such design being accomplished; but such person, or the person in whose behalf the defense was made, if he was the assailant or engaged in mutual combat, must really and in good faith have endeavored to decline any further struggle before the homicide was committed; or,
   4. When necessarily committed in attempting, by lawful ways and means, to apprehend any person for any felony committed, or in lawfully suppressing any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace.
 
198.  A bare fear of the commission of any of the offenses mentioned in subdivisions 2 and 3 of Section 197, to prevent which homicide may be lawfully committed, is not sufficient to justify it.  But the circumstances must be sufficient to excite the fears of a reasonable person, and the party killing must have acted under the influence ofsuch fears alone.
 
198.5.  Any person using force intended or likely to cause death or great bodily injury within his or her residence shall be presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily injury to self, family, or a member of the household when that force is used against another person, not a member of the family orhousehold, who unlawfully and forcibly enters or has unlawfully and forcibly entered the residence and the person using the force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry occurred.
   As used in this section, great bodily injury means a significant or substantial physical injury

Firearms Policy

For me the idea of anyone allowed to legally carry firearms in any country seems like a bad one. I'm not an NRA member and never will be. I'm a pacifist and feel that firearms only belong in the hands of trained police officers and members of the military. I in no way support the second amendment and feel that there are no positive or safely regulated militias and that people should in no way have the right to carry and bear arms and that this law does need to infringed upon and abolished. The only policy that I would support regarding the second amendment would be for persons of the police or military force who are regulated and trained and held accountable for their actions. We need less guns, not more people are to incapable of handling the responsibility of privately owned firearms and more death than good comes from the second amendment. There are no excusable situations to use deadly force, it is just as easy to take down and diffuse someone or a situation and imprison them as it is to end them.