Kevin Gowen wrote:

> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
>
> > mtfester@netMAPSONscape.net wrote:
> >
> >>So, basically, you disagree with the Bill of Rights.
> >
> > [Fourth and Fifth] Also the First Amendment. That makes three, or I should say, PARTS of three
> amendments. Why do you say basically, as if I support throwing it all out?
>
> At least you are honest.

I'd rather have people steer clear of me for being honest and having very few people I can trust to
stand by me, than trying to maintain a false image or ties with acquaintances who don't really know
or understand me. It is also much easier to read, watch TV, use the Internet, go shopping, and take
long strolls, if I use my personal time (when my family is asleep or they are at work and school)
mainly for myself instead of trying to socialize with many people.

After going back to my World Almanac and Book of Facts 2004, I see that I also disagree with parts
of the 8th Amendment. Why should we not have "unusual" punishments? My graduation thesis for high
school was about alternatives to incarceration. We were required to go to the local courthouse's
legal library and use their magazines and volumes to write our papers on aspects of law. My paper
was only about 12 pages long, with relatively few cites. One concern of mine (in 1986) was trying
to save the government money, as prison overcrowding was already a problem. The only part I can
remember was citing the (actual) use of radio transmitters on the ankle, to ensure the minor
offender remained at home, meaning the expense of housing, clothing and feeding them was their own
responsibility.

Another concern (in 1986) was keeping minor offenders from the clutches of hardened criminals. Some
people complain about minor offenders walking up and down the street in the middle of town with a
sandwich board proclaiming them to be criminals, to keep themselves out of jail. One American who
stole office supplies and was featured on TV, was reported to have fled to the UK (in shame?). What
kind of person is he to be too ashamed to be publicly known and remembered as someone who does
something wrong, but fairly common? His former coworkers probably did the same themselves.

So that's parts of FOUR out of ten of the original ten amendments, or three out of the five that
seem to apply to rights of the accused in criminal cases.

> Courts have been snipping away parts of the
> Bill of Rights for decades but act astonished when you call them on it.
> "I was just interpreting the document and found a right to stab scissors
> into a baby's brain! How did that get there?"

So I looked at what the 16th Amendment was yesterday. I am not surprised.