How long are you willing to be on Lockdown?

[charsan]

It's just much harder to amend constitutional law than it is parliamentary law.

The Bill of Rights is not legislated as your countries things are, your can be taken away at a whim and the Constitution was to limit Government. The Bill of Rights was done so that the Government could not take our rights away at it's whim and just because. The founders for the most part understood that when men come to power they take advantage of people's rights as can be seen with this pandemic.

For instance in many parts of the world they say you can't meet for Church, even if you want to do it safely you can never do it. Here there have been successful lawsuits defending our freedom to go to Churches even if it is just drive up or less than 10 people. You see we place much more emphasis on personal freedom and liberty than any other country

 

[timothyu]

the bigger the chances of it mutating in a dangerous way that could become more deadly.

Or the other direction.

 

[loveofourlord]

Or the other direction.

Which read some articles though don't know their validity that it may have happened, the reason new york was hit so badly was it was the same strain as italy and spain, where as la and other places got a milder strain.

 

[timothyu]

other places got a milder strain.

There is only one strain but it seems dna related and is similar to Fausi's HIV immune suppressing virus.

 

[eclipsenow]

One reason I would add for the lockdown, and a concern that I forgot about but had with H1N1, is that the longer the virus is around, and more people it infects, the bigger the chances of it mutating in a dangerous way that could become more deadly.

There is that! Agreed.

 

[RDKirk]

One example of the blind spots and prejudices of one generating being encoded for all time into the constitution of a nation and affecting the future in unpredictable ways is the infamous American 2nd Amendment.
"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."
You had a unique period in history just after your rebellion against the British.
It seemed like a good idea to guarantee access to muskets.
You wrote it into the constitution.
The weapons and people bearing those weapons changed.
Automatic, semi-automatic, self-loading rifles appeared - as powerful as military weapons from the Vietnam era war, itself a war many centuries after the muskets of the 'well regulated militia'.
The time and the technology moved on, but the 'right' to own gun didn't.
You now have angry young men driving round the hood with paramilitary strength weapons, and a death toll of 300,000 per decade. "A well regulated Militia?" I think not. You've losing as many people in 2 years as you lost in the entire Vietnam war. That's a higher and faster casualty rate than Vietnam! Yet you can't do a thing to stop it.

Australia had the Port Arthur massacre, banned all sorts of categories of weapons, ran one of the biggest government funded buy-backs in history (hand in your weapon and get refunded), and haven't had an equivalent shooting since. Why? Our population demanded action after the massacre - and our politicians gave it.

In your country that would be illegal, as the Supreme Court are not politicians and are duty bound to 'interpret' a dusty old piece of paper as binding to a modern nation whose circumstances are radically different today than centuries ago when the 2nd Amendment was written.

Your right to life seems way down on the priorities behind the NRL's right to earn billions. Your 'Bill of Rights' is doing more harm than good.

The silly prejudices or blind spots of one generation become an almost unbreakable impediment to future generations. It's just much harder to amend constitutional law than it is parliamentary law.

There are plenty of restrictions in various states on the availability of firearms, and few of them are struck down in the Supreme Court.

Remember that the Bill of Rights can be changed...if enough people want to change it.

What you're complaining about is that at this point in time not enough people in the US want to change it. If you took a poll today, you would not get more than 50% of Americans willing to repeal the 2nd Amendment. Probably not more than 40%.

 

[Kentonio]

The Bill of Rights is not legislated as your countries things are, your can be taken away at a whim and the Constitution was to limit Government. The Bill of Rights was done so that the Government could not take our rights away at it's whim and just because. The founders for the most part understood that when men come to power they take advantage of people's rights as can be seen with this pandemic.

For instance in many parts of the world they say you can't meet for Church, even if you want to do it safely you can never do it. Here there have been successful lawsuits defending our freedom to go to Churches even if it is just drive up or less than 10 people. You see we place much more emphasis on personal freedom and liberty than any other country

You think you do, yet in practice how true actually is that? The police are much more authoritarian in the US than they are in most other western democracies, your entire justice system is based around the ability of the accused to be able to afford quality legal protection, your healthcare system is again based on your ability to pay, and liberty often seems to not extend to people’s freedom to not have their own enjoyment of life ruined by others recklessness and selfishness.