Laws you would like enacted, repealed or changed

[mgb_phys]

How would you enforce the 10th amendment?

Fences around each state?

 

[edpell]

Fences around each state?

Have you tried to drive into California? They already have the fences and border check points.

 

[mgb_phys]

Yes but there are miles of undefended border.
Tree huggers from Oregon could sneak into Northern California and wipeout the local tree-hugging population by taking anti-logging protesting sites from native Northern Californians.

 

[MotoH]

Ok, obviously we come from very different ideological viewpoints. I am curious, what do you feel would be the advantage of this hyper-militarization of the US?

To put it in simplest terms, Wouldn't you rather have the neccesary weapons to protect the United States in the event of an act of aggression? I for one would rather have something and not need it, than need something and not have it. Kind of like carrying a pistol. You never hope to use it on someone, but it is there if the deed is called upon.

And the mandatory military service I believe is a great idea because its really the least you can do for the country you live in. If I were in power I would take the same concept Israel has, although they are a mandatory 3 years I believe.

 

[edpell]

Yes but there are miles of undefended border.
Tree huggers from Oregon could sneak into Northern California and wipeout the local tree-hugging population by taking anti-logging protesting sites from native Northern Californians.

You are right clearly California needs to beef up its borders to stop illegal immigration from the north or whatever direction it may come from. ;)

 

[edpell]

To put it in simplest terms, Wouldn't you rather have the neccesary weapons to protect the United States in the event of an act of aggression? I for one would rather have something and not need it, than need something and not have it. Kind of like carrying a pistol. You never hope to use it on someone, but it is there if the deed is called upon.

And the mandatory military service I believe is a great idea because its really the least you can do for the country you live in. If I were in power I would take the same concept Israel has, although they are a mandatory 3 years I believe.

Two points.

Forced service is slavery which is prohibited under the Constitution.

The federal government borrows more than 50% of every dollar it spends. So how do you propose increasing spending? Will the Chinese work harder in order to buy more US debt paper?

 

[Char. Limit]

How would you enforce the 10th amendment?

Not with nukes, I'll tell you that much right now.

 

[edpell]

Yes but there are miles of undefended border.
Tree huggers from Oregon could sneak into Northern California and wipeout the local tree-hugging population by taking anti-logging protesting sites from native Northern Californians.

I think it would be more a question of the cash rich marijuana growing fields of northern California.

 

[mgb_phys]

And protect the US from Canadian frisbees

Beltran said he instructs his agents to use discretion and "common sense." It goes like this: "If a kid [on the Canada side] throws a Frisbee over here, he can come and get it. But if he got the Frisbee and kept walking down to the Arby's to get a soda, we're going to stop you."

http://proinmigrant.blogspot.com/2008/08/border-fence-between-canada-and-us.html

 

[edpell]

And protect the US from Canadian frisbees

http://proinmigrant.blogspot.com/2008/08/border-fence-between-canada-and-us.html

Clearly you misunderstand. It is not the frisbee threat they are dealing with it is the scarcity of soda that is at issue.

 

[edpell]

Not with nukes, I'll tell you that much right now.

The only sovereign entities are those that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems. All others entities are clients to a patron that does have nukes. So if the fifty states wish to be sovereign they must have nukes.

 

[Char. Limit]

The only sovereign entities are those that have nuclear weapons and delivery systems. All others entities are clients to a patron that does have nukes. So if the fifty states wish to be sovereign they must have nukes.

The tenth amendment states that the powers given to the states are all those that are neither given to the federal government nor explicitly prohibited the states by the constitution. The military (and nukes) are a power given to the federal government under the Constitution (you don't see people fighting on the NYS Enterprise or joining the Marine Corps of Idaho, do you?) What you are suggesting is unconstitutional.

Also, everyone who says "make this or that considered treason" is also suggesting something unconstitutional. Treason is the one crime defined in the Constitution, defined as "only in levying war against [the United States], or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort."

 

[MotoH]

Two points.

Forced service is slavery which is prohibited under the Constitution.

The federal government borrows more than 50% of every dollar it spends. So how do you propose increasing spending? Will the Chinese work harder in order to buy more US debt paper?

Forced service slavery? Maybe for those who want to "steal" from the US. If you honestly can't give four years of your life (which isn't active duty mind you) to the United States, how do you deserve to live here?

Quit buying oil from OPEC to start with, drill drill drill in northern Alaska. We are too far in debt to get out of it instantly (7 trillion didn't help either.) but it will take time, and if we start using our own resources and stop buying from others we will eventually start making up that debt.

 

[Char. Limit]

Not active duty? Please. The generals in Washington will say "look at all these able-bodied troops we're wasting! Let's send them off to war to die!"

There's a reason I oppose the draft, and why I'm not joining up.
Also, why should I have to die for my country in order to live there?

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

Most European countries have a mandatory service system. Either a stint in the military or the same time in a community service organization similar to the Volunteers in Service to America (VISTA) program. Hey if European socialism programs is good enough to have here in the USA let's have their requirements to serve the community as well.

 

[Char. Limit]

For the last time...

I'm... not... a... socialist.

I'm also 17, so I'd be the one affected by the law, unlike most of the people on this board.

Plus, Europeans aren't fighting two wars and being short on troops and all.

Also, it's been shown that morale is higher in an all-volunteer army.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I would like to see the laws against murder and theft repealed as they are an unfunded mandate to small business.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Ah, I remember being 17 and knowing everything.

Please. The generals in Washington will say "look at all these able-bodied troops we're wasting! Let's send them off to war to die!"

I think you might want to review how wars are declared under the US Constitution. You'll discover that "generals in Washington" aren't able to declare war on their own. Also, the idea that they want the men and women under their command to die is rather offensive - do you have any evidence for this claim of yours? Or were you just makin' stuff up?

 

[ThomasEdison]

All vehicles with an empty GVW over 4000 Lbs [would include most SUVs] are treated as tractor-trailers - required to drive in the right-most lanes, never to exceed 55 mph, and subject to stiffer penalties for moving violations.

I like this.

 

[dotman]

Please. The generals in Washington will say "look at all these able-bodied troops we're wasting! Let's send them off to war to die!"

I think you might want to review how wars are declared under the US Constitution. You'll discover that "generals in Washington" aren't able to declare war on their own. Also, the idea that they want the men and women under their command to die is rather offensive - do you have any evidence for this claim of yours? Or were you just makin' stuff up?

While he certainly phrased it poorly, the intent of his post is not without merit. The US armed services is stretched right now, with guard units routinely being activated for multiple tours, and regular service men and women having their tours lengthened, etc.

There is absolutely no question that if there were mandatory service requirements, many of those young people would be sent to foreign theaters. A sizeable portion would see combat.

In today's day and age, this also would beg the question-- would women also be required to serve? How would that go over, do you think?

Ah, I remember being 17 and knowing everything.

Come on now, you don't have to patronize him.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Come on now, you don't have to patronize him.

I certainly do. Words have meaning. One needs to be responsible for how one uses them.

 

[MotoH]

While he certainly phrased it poorly, the intent of his post is not without merit. The US armed services is stretched right now, with guard units routinely being activated for multiple tours, and regular service men and women having their tours lengthened, etc.

There is absolutely no question that if there were mandatory service requirements, many of those young people would be sent to foreign theaters. A sizeable portion would see combat.

In today's day and age, this also would beg the question-- would women also be required to serve? How would that go over, do you think?



Come on now, you don't have to patronize him.

I completely agree that we are being stretched as a military right now and we need to focus our efforts on one theatre at a time, although I wish it were no theatres of operations.

Of course women would be required to serve! Did they not spend the last 50 to 60 years (not sure how long ago the womens rights movement started) to be treated equally with men? I know plenty of women who can shoot just as straight as men can.

Now remember, it isn't active duty that I am looking for, where you spend 4 years on base or in operation. It is just like the reserve, you go to BCT for 6 weeks, then it is once monthly where you RTB and practice your skill set. God forbid that we actually have to mobilize and go to war, the active duty will of course be sent out first, followed by the reserves to fill the requirement for the troops needed. After four years you are out and you get to continue on with the job you are in or continue on with college.

 

[Char. Limit]

Actually, women wanted all of the rights men had, but none of the responsibilities.

Thanks dotman. You're a lifesaver for my incendiary comments.

 

[Argentum Vulpes]

For the last time...

I'm... not... a... socialist.

I'm also 17, so I'd be the one affected by the law, unlike most of the people on this board.

Plus, Europeans aren't fighting two wars and being short on troops and all.

Also, it's been shown that morale is higher in an all-volunteer army.

I'm not 100% sure how the mandatory service works in other EU countries. However in Germany if you are a conscious objector to military service then for your service part you are placed in a VISTA type program. It is not military service but a volunteer program where you do things like pick up highways, build houses, work at homeless shelters, work with disabled children, etc. So the military would still be a all volunteer army, no need to go into the military to help your country.

 

[Galteeth]

Forced service slavery? Maybe for those who want to "steal" from the US. If you honestly can't give four years of your life (which isn't active duty mind you) to the United States, how do you deserve to live here?

I would say on the other hand, what gives others the right to steal four years of my life, and why should murderers be allowed to live here? Morality's funny like that. My "right" is basically you're "wrong" and vice-versa.

 

[MotoH]

I would say on the other hand, what gives others the right to steal four years of my life, and why should murderers be allowed to live here? Morality's funny like that. My "right" is basically you're "wrong" and vice-versa.

for the sake of clarification, what do you mean by the sentence in bold?

 

[turbo]

In Maine, we had a law allowing same-sex marriages. It lasted only as long as it took for the evangelicals and the Catholic church to scrape up millions of dollars for a scare-tactic ad campaign to convince gullible idiots to shoot it down in a referendum. The ads constantly drummed on how dangerous gay marriage would be to children and how gay marriage would be "taught" in our public schools. Those lies had no basis in fact and there was not a shred of evidence in support of them, but it worked.

I would like to see that referendum overturned, but there are quite a few people here that either fear gays or hate them and wish to deny them legal rights that the rest of us enjoy, like rights of inheritance, medical visitation, and shared responsibility for legal decisions between couples.

 

[MotoH]

In Maine, we had a law allowing same-sex marriages. It lasted only as long as it took for the evangelicals and the Catholic church to scrape up millions of dollars for a scare-tactic ad campaign to convince gullible idiots to shoot it down in a referendum. The ads constantly drummed on how dangerous gay marriage would be to children and how gay marriage would be "taught" in our public schools. Those lies had no basis in fact and there was not a shred of evidence in support of them, but it worked.

I would like to see that referendum overturned, but there are quite a few people here that either fear gays or hate them and wish to deny them legal rights that the rest of us enjoy, like rights of inheritance, medical visitation, and shared responsibility for legal decisions between couples.

Honestly I don't see why anyone should have a problem with gay marriage. Since they obviously can't have children naturally, they adopt! And to think a lot of churches put a lot of money into orphanages and the like, yet they don't want to have the kids go to a nice home!

I do believe there should be a law that says you must adopt from the US though, it is great that people will adopt a boy from Uganda or some African country, but we have a lot of orphans in the United States, and they should be taken care of also.

 

[Jamin2112]

The first things that come to mind:
-Lower the drinking age to 18.

Yes.

-Legalize marijuana.

Yes.

-Tax gasoline.

It already is taxed.

-End both of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Uhhhhhh I fail to see what that has to do with "laws"

-Begin wide-spread reform to stop global warming, including heavy taxes on CO2 emissions by factories.

You can do all you want to this alleged global warming. Buy an electric car, create your own environmental think thank, etc. It's a free country -- who is stopping you?

-Tax goods imported from countries with little/no worker rights in such a way that it would be cheaper to produce them in the US or at least countries that respect their workers.

I'm all about taxing imported goods, so yes to this one.

-Make lobbying by corporations equivalent to treason. Congress should answer only to the people they are elected to represent, not big-business.

Tell me, why is "big-business" bad? Doesn't every big business start as a small business? Don't small businesses aspire to become big?

-Criminalize discrimination based on sexual orientation.

My name is Bob and I'm starting a company called Bob Inc. I only want employees who make proper lifestyle choices. Why should the state (since we're talking "laws") have a say in who Bob hires?

-Dispose of 50% or more of the United State's atomic-weapon arsenal.

Just so we can feel warm and fuzzy inside? Or this a practical, real reason for this?

-Pass a law requiring the President to renew any authorization for military action every two years. Any president that fails to do so, even if they are off by as little as a day, will be immediately impeached, removed from office, and charged with treason.

Congress has the power of the purse, so technically his military action is reauthorized every year.

-Cap military funding in half, and appropriate half of that extra money to education.

As a percentage of GDP, United States military spending is lower than it has been for many years. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features/BudgetChartbook/Images/federal-spending_12-580.jpg


And of course, the solution to our education problems is more money.

-Require the President to give weekly, televised updates to the people he/she serves.

No.

-Repeal the No Child Left Behind Act.

And also eliminate the Department Of Education. Glad we're on the same page.

-Declassify any and all information in the government that isn't an immediate security risk.

Meaningless, as anything can be titled "an immediate security risk".

-End the "War on Drugs" in general. It's a waste of money that could be spent on giving children an education.

Yes.

-Provide funding to achieve a >75% level of alternative-energy usage in the US by 2020 (or a reasonable date).

How 'bout nuclear power?

 

[Char. Limit]

Gay marriage should be legal. They are human, after all, unless someone would like to dispute that.

Nuclear power is the most viable option...

 

[Jamin2112]

Gay marriage should be legal. They are human, after all, unless someone would like to dispute that.

Nuclear power is the most viable option...

Nobody said gays weren't human.

The question at hand is 'should the state redefine marriage'?

–noun
1. the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/marriage"

Should we change that to "the social institution under which a man/woman and a man/woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc."

Heck. Why should it be a man/woman? That implies only one. We can't let those darn religious nut cases impose their in-exclusivity and intolerance on us all!

the social institution under which men/women and men/women establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

Want to help me lacerate the dictionary and destroy tradition some more?

 

[edpell]

I do not think the government should have any thing to do with marriages. What ever agreements a group of consenting adults wants to enter into is their business not the governments.

The government is involved in taxes and death taxes. I would choose taxes the same regardless of what ever personal covenants individual tax payers enter into. As to forgiving the death tax for transfer of property between pair bonded (or group bonded) tax payers sure hetro and homo sexual pairs both should have an exemption.

 

[Char. Limit]

Watch out, Jamin, you're getting closer to an institution truly morally wrong... child-adult marriage.

However, I can't remember why they banned adult polygamy. Someone remind me?

A serious question that last one.

 

[Jamin2112]

Watch out, Jamin, you're getting closer to an institution truly morally wrong... child-adult marriage.

However, I can't remember why they banned adult polygamy. Someone remind me?

A serious question that last one.

I'd like to know where your morals come from.

 

[mgb_phys]

However, I can't remember why they banned adult polygamy. Someone remind me?

People were enjoying it?