Is the U.S. Bill of Rights REDACTED or GUTTED?

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

constitution

By Catherine J. Frompovich

The other day I received an email with the subject line “Redacted/gutted Bill of Rights.” Boy, did that get my attention, especially since I consider myself to be somewhat of a constitutional admirer and scholar.

As I read that email, the original Bill of Rights were listed and each Right that the person, who did the ‘redacting’ thought had been gutted from citizens, was superimposed with red font text. The provision(s) by which each Right was interpreted to be obliterated or gutted was typed in red.

The more I read, the more I realized that we, as a Nation, certainly are in more trouble than we realize if apparently-informed citizens are thinking that way. The person, unknown to me as it was a forward, obviously was learned in the law! As a result, I had to rethink my assessment of what was posted in the email, since things really are getting squirrely. Should we be questioning what role “political correctness” may be fueling problems? [10]

Furthermore, what is the U.S. Supreme Court doing to preserve constitutional rights? Don’t we seem to have a SCOTUS that is pop-culture oriented, rather than historically resolute?

The redacted Bill of Rights wouldn’t leave me alone because the person who prepared it apparently was hitting more home runs rather than striking out. So, I thought I’d ask my readers what you think about the Bill of Rights being gutted.

Below I’ve listed all ten original Rights ratified December 15, 1791. The “father, author and key champion of the Bill of Rights,” James Madison, understood the problems with government, especially oppressive ones, from which the colonies had freed themselves. Why would anyone want to live under an oppressive government? Madison has always been a hero of mine; I liked his higher-consciousness “style.”

Furthermore, I’ve underlined those parts of each Right that the unknown person redacted in black ink, and I have typed in italics script what that person feels was the mechanism by which the Right(s) had been gutted and, ostensibly, no longer apply to USA citizens or its revered Constitution, which some claim is an obsolete and outdated document. Nothing could be further from the facts. It’s needed now more than ever, in my opinion. Since when have oppressive governments been banned from the face of the earth? We don’t need one—nor want one—in the United States of America, I contend. How about you?

Question: 224 years (Dec. 9, 2015) almost to the date of ratification, I feel compelled to ask this question: Do we want to lose our Constitutional rights so valiantly fought for by our forefathers and foremothers in favor of often-misguided and often-biased “political correctness”?

Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution

Amendment I

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. Federal Restricted Buildings and Grounds Improvement Act 2011 [1]

Amendment II

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.

Amendment III

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Bank Secrecy Act 1970 [2] and U.S. Patriot Act 2001 [3]

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Military Commissions Act 2006 [4] + 2009 [5]; NDAA 2012 [6]; Comprehensive Crime Control Act 1981 [7]

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. Military Commission Act 2006 [4] + 2009 [5]; NDAA 2012 [6]; U.S. Patriot Act 2001 [3]

Amendment VII

In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Torture Memos 2002 [7]

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. United States v. Carolene Products 1938 [8]

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. Wickard v. Filburn 1942 [9]

Look what it’s come to!

The photo below speaks volumes, I’d say. Will every homeowner have to mount a similar approach to keeping safe? How can we, when the Second Amendment to the Constitution is being attacked? How come some people get protection and others can’t? Do we have to rethink a magnitude of socio-political issues in the USA to arrive at a sane and workable strategy for ALL?

america

A U.S. Secret Service countersniper stands on the roof of the White House at sunrise, Sunday, Dec. 6, 2015, in Washington. President Barack Obama will address the nation from the Oval Office on Sunday night about the steps the government is taking to fulfill his highest priority: Keeping the American people safe. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik) Source

I am NOT a gun person but, realistically, guns don’t shoot all by themselves; foolish and mentally-misguided individuals do. Society needs to address why so many U.S. citizens are taking issues into their own hands. I don’t think we’ve addressed that properly—yet.

Governments train young men to kill during ‘political-muscle-flexing’ wars, but probably haven’t figured out there are long-lasting mental issues that some can’t deal with after having spent a ‘legal’ time killing people in other countries.

When will we learn violence is NOT the answer?

(References)

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).


Contributed by Activist Post of www.activistpost.com.

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • cama9

    Ms Frompovitch needs a bit of schooling.
    US citizens do not have ‘constitutional rights’ – we have NATURAL RIGHTS. there are no such things as constitutional rights because the government does not give us our rights. Governments never give, they only take.
    The Bill of Rights is a list of things the government is FORBIDDEN to do to us… ‘shall not’ is legalese for prohibited.
    Madison was NOT the father or key champion of the BoR – he actually didn’t want them at all. He only stuck them in, and a few years after the Constitution’s ratification, because Virginia would not sign without them. The main credit for getting the BoR added to the Constitution goes to George Mason. How can you not know this?
    As for the SCOTUS – they’ve always been a shady group starting with John Marshall who claimed that the Supreme Court has judicial review. Where in the Constitution did it authorize SCOTUS to have that power? It doesn’t. Please read this and learn!
    http://constitutionality.us/SupremeCourt.html
    All the power is vested in the People who created the government. Until we learn that, and use it, we’re a lost cause.

  • Right to the Point

    Every one of our rights has been/is being violated. Those blanks could easily be filled in…..

  • ted metz

    The gutting of the Bill of Rights started with the redaction of the Preamble to the Bill of Rights which includes these words – “THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution”

  • The Amendments aren’t followed by Burger King, why should they be followed by any corporation? What does a foreign owned corporation care about them?

  • SP_88

    The government will always use whatever ambiguous excuses they can think of for depriving us of our rights. And there will always be those who fall for it and believe the lies used to fool us, especially if it is accompanied by some sort of theater, perhaps a false flag or some sort of mass shooting. It’s always done with the “intentions” of making us safer from the latest boogie man or crisis.
    If people would just make a habit of saying NO to every politician who comes up with some hairbrained and asinine legislation that goes against the constitution, no matter how much sense it seems to make, we would be so much better off. If it’s unconstitutional, it’s probably bad for us and should be rejected. And if it comes from a politician who has a habit of introducing such unconstitutional legislation, perhaps it’s time to get rid of him or her. Because consistently trying to violate the constitution is a clear sign of a problem.
    Unfortunately, we as a people, have let things go for far too long. We have gone from a proactive and involved people to a lazy and complacent people with the attitude that someone else will do it. There are millions of people in America, and we have become dependent on the hope that somebody else will take care of it for us, somebody else will sign that petition or call that congressman to complain about a bill.
    I don’t know if it was purposely designed like this or if it’s a result of this, but we have succumbed to the feeling that “I’m only one person with one vote, so what does it matter”. And I don’t know if that was a feeling that was purposely spread amongst we the people in order to discourage us from participating in our government and voting and petitioning, etc, but it’s the opposite of what we should be doing. The more of us that get involved, the better off we are. And the most important aspect of this is to be well informed. We need to be knowledgeable about the workings of government, at least to a small degree. We need to act from a position of knowledge. Because having a bunch of ill informed people voting against us does no good for either side.
    You would think that having access to the internet would help people to be more informed about politics and government. You would think that being able to look up an almost unlimited source of information about everyone and everything that it would be so much harder for politicians to fool the people with these extremely weak lies. But it seems like the opposite is true. It seems like people are as drunk, high and stupid as ever.
    And of course a bunch of greedy bankers and politicians are going to take advantage of us. Even if people did pay attention it would be a constant battle to maintain our rights and freedoms. But if we paid attention all along, and kept the pressure on, we wouldn’t be in this mess.
    The government is our servant and we are their boss, but as a boss, we have dropped the ball. And as a result, the dishonest people amongst us have found a way to exploit this weakness. They started off small and gradually worked their way up to where they are now.
    But regardless of whether this was planned long ago by elitists or if it was a spontaneous idea perpetrated by greedy opportunists, if we were watching what was going on, we could have avoided a lot of the problems we have now.

  • Sam300

    Shall not infringe on right to bear arms

    There are hundreds if not thousands of laws to trip someone up to lose their gun rights and too many laws against what type of gun or ammno etc and forms and hoops to jump through etc.

    If someone serves his time in jail or prison – then he/she should get ALL their rights back including right to vote and bear arms. There are so many laws now that are felonies denies millions the right to bear arms and to vote for the rest of their lives. . They did their time. It is ironic illegals are voting when millions of Americans are cut out of the process.

    If someone is in jail or on parole – NO voting not guns.
    If someone is in a mental institution – NO voting and no guns.

    People with Downs Syndrome and other mentally challenged people should not get a gun or be able to vote because their learning ability is that of an young child. Ditto for those with Alzheimer etc. During the 2008 elections dems were busing nursing home elder who didn’t know what day it was to the polls. In 2012, they “helped” them fill out absentee ballots inside the nursing home and mailed the ballots in for them. Nursing homes should have a psychiatrist evaluate whether someone is capable of voting for not so these people are not “used” for their vote.