The Failure of the Constitution to Meet the Needs of a Rapidly Changing Society

‘Transformed beyond recognition from the vision of the Founding Fathers.’ Discuss this view of the modern US constitution.

here were many ways that the Constitution helped to change the weaknesses of the United States. It helps by making the laws easier to pass and more fair, along with different documents. The Articles of Confederation were obviously a flawed document if they needed to be changed into the Constitution, thus the Constitution is helping.

     Are you willing to sit back and become a victim of violent crime or allow the government to tamper with your civil liberties? In recent years, anti-gun politicians have attempted to control guns in the name of crime prevention this is an assault on the Second Amendment rights of US citizens . The Second Amendment states, “ 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.” Not only did our Founding Fathers focus their debate on the right of people to keep and bear arms, they devoted energy to encouraging future generations to defend theses freedoms. In defense of gun ownership, Alexander Hamilton said, “If

The Constitution should change with society. Like all societies, ours changes with time. Like it or not, things will be different in the future. Although we agree with things we are doing now, we may not in the future. Our constitution is ment to be part of a lasting government in the land of the free. If the USA really wishes to be held up to that title, its people must be able to agree, and if needed, change the Constitution.

Without a doubt on of the most morally debated topics currently within our society is the topic of gun control. Mass shooting has been running rampant within our communities and gun violence in the United States is at an all time high. At page value there should not be a debate on the topic. The easy solution is to legally restrict the ownership of guns from all citizens. However, the way our constitution was developed the people of the United States have the right to bear arms and the government cannot infringe on that right. Many believe that the removal of guns from private citizens would leave them vulnerable to those who do not follow laws. The right to bear arms is simply about protection and should not be tampered with. Since

After the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the United States Government was reorganized under the Constitution. This gave the federal government far more power than did the Articles of Confederation, which invested power within the states. Basically, the Constitution created three branches of government (Executive, Judicial, and Legislative) which would work together to run the government. To make sure that there was an equal balance of power among the branches, a system of checks and balances was devised so that each branch could limit the power of the others. It is important to note that "the doctrine of separation of powers is not established by any constitutional provision [but] rather it emerges from he framers'

The constitution first started to provide protection over tyranny in the summer of 1787 where fifty-five delegates met in Philadelphia to help readjust the national government for the better. The task of each representative was to come together to create ideas without letting one person or any one group be in hold of too much power in order for the central government to grow stronger. The constitution had help led by the Articles of Confederation with their influence on not having a court system to make the state force a pay on taxes. The main challenge was to generate a Constitution that would be strong enough to retain possession of power for each state to a minimum so not a single person was the only one to have power or control. The guard on tyranny was supported in 4 ways federalism,separation of powers, checks and balances and small/large state compromises.

One of the main problems with the constitution is what some may argue that the role of the president was not very thought of and linked to the constitution, therefore jeopardizing the nation to a dysfunctional and dangerous presidency. Throughout the history of American government, there have been a couple presidencies which have managed to gain high power and disregard the wellbeing of the nation, behave inappropriately and even unconstitutional.

In the initial years of the United States a meeting of delegates appointed by the several states met for the sole purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation. The result of this meeting was the creation of the U.S. Constitution that would soon become the ultimate directive for both Federal and State Governments. Since its birth it has been revised, amended, and ratified in order to solidify the allocation of power between the separate branches of government. Although this may be the case, distribution of the powers has been disputed ever since the formation of the Constitution. These political, legal, and quasi-legal constitutional disputes triggered civil unrest and led to explicit acts of opposition involving nullification and

Gun control has a history dating back to 1791, when the Second Amendment of the Constitution was ratified. However, more recently, the debate over gun control has escalated into a much more public issue to which many citizens can relate. After all, stories about incidents involving guns appear frequently today in newspapers and on television or the radio. One could say that the debate started with the passage of the Gun Control Act of 1968, which banned ownership of guns by certain groups of people and regulated the sale of guns. Since then, two main groups have gradually appeared: people who oppose strict federal

rights as seen in the examples mentioned previously. However it can be argued that all

In 2011, three legal and constitutional scholars, Peter Aucoin, Mark D. Jarvis and Lori Turnbull set out to write a book detailing what they believed to be obvious and egregious errors in the way in which the current form of responsible government as it was practiced in the Canadian federal government, fell short of operating within basic democratic parameters. Canada has a system that is based one the Westminster system, in which its the Constitution act of 1867 is influenced by British principles and conventions. “Democratizing the Constitution reforming responsible government” is a book that makes an analysis for the reform of responsible government in Canada. The authors believe that from the unclear rules, pertaining to the role and power of the prime minster foresees for a failing responsible government. In this essay the functions of the government , conventions of the constitution, the a proposal for reform will be addressed.

I believe that the ideals of the founding fathers have diminished because many people don’t have the freedom that they should, people are racist, and not as many people seem to believe it is necessary to vote anymore. These ideals include liberty, self-government, and equality.

are all human beings and in my opinion, deserve the same rights as everyone else. There are many

Hardly one month has passed since the 19 November elections for the Constituent Assembly II, the popular hope and enthusiasm that the CA II will write a new constitution within six months to a year has already been dissipating in the political rough and tumble of Kathmandu. The only way to get the constitution as promised, it seems, is to let the current bureaucratic government continue until the task is complete.