On the surface, this sounds good. But with a federal Bill of Rights you get a federal interpretation of the Bill of Rights.
You get free speech interpreted as nude dancing, but not political speech 30 days before an election. Free speech does NOT include a high school student saying "God" at his commencement ceremony.
Freedon of religion? Try freedom from religion -- a hundred examples.
Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures? No-knock, anyone? Asset forfeiture, anyone?
And since you don't mind in the least that the federal bill of rights trumps states' bills of rights, then you don't mind that these USSC rulings apply to each and every state. Sorry, but I mind.
On the surface, this sounds good. But with a federal Bill of Rights you get a federal interpretation of the Bill of Rights.
And that fed interpretation can be challenged by our States. Rarely is because States are controlled by the same Rinocratic cabal as the feds.
You get free speech interpreted as nude dancing,
Nude dancing is NOT 'evil', paulsen. Grow up.
but not political speech 30 days before an election.
Blame the Rinocrats.
Free speech does NOT include a high school student saying "God" at his commencement ceremony.
Wrong venue to be preaching about god.
Freedon of religion? Try freedom from religion -- a hundred examples.
Yada yada.
Freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures? No-knock, anyone? Asset forfeiture, anyone?
Yep, the feds violate our constitution. So do State/local governments.
-- Paulsen, your claim that CA can violate our RKBA's encourages that POV. -- People like you are a BIG part of the problem.
And since you don't mind in the least that the federal bill of rights trumps states' bills of rights, then you don't mind that these USSC rulings apply to each and every state. Sorry, but I mind.
Your 'mind' is very confused, paulsen. Get some lessons in logic.
Granted your point about interpretation, robertpaulsen. But my point is there's nothing wrong with the federal BoR as it is written. The problem is the refusal of judges and justices to follow the plain language and meaning of the BoR. Such that when the language states the government may not prohibit or infringe, the courts seem to regard these texts as suggestions, not demands that they are bound by their oaths of office to comply with.
What passes for the liberal mind these days does not honor or respect the ideas and values of the Framers. As far as a whole lot of such people are concerned, the Constitution might as well have been written by Mickey Mouse, for all the authority it carries with them.