Re: [問題]有沒有美國禁的了煙禁不了槍的八卦阿
※ 引述《thinkmema (政治發明家)》之銘言:
: 雖說軍火商的勢力很大
: 煙商也不小吧
: 比起二手煙
: 槍的危害也不會比較小阿
: 而且只要造成傷害 就很嚴重
: 為什麼美國禁的了煙禁不了槍
THE BILL OF RIGHTS
The Conventions of a number of the States having, at the time of 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;
Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of
America, in Congress assembled, two-thirds of both Houses concurring, that
the following articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States,
as amendments to the Constitution of the United States; all or any of which
articles, when ratified by three-fourths of the said Legislatures, to be
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the said Constitution, namely:
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.
權利法案
前言
美國憲法的草創人沒有在憲法中擬定一項權利法案。此一缺漏的原因並非由於他們不關心
基本人權,而是因為他們覺得,憲法既沒有特別授權管理出版或集會自由之類的事務,當
然也就不需要特別陳明不存在這種權力。這一立場從邏輯上講是正確的,但從心理上講則
不然;美國人民普遍希望憲法中明文規定他們的權利。第一屆國會集會後不久,詹姆斯.
麥迪遜提出一項很長的權利法案,作為憲法的修正案。國會一共通過了十二條修正案。但
是,只有十條為各州所批准,並於一七九一年十二月十五日正式成為憲法的一部分。這些
修正案被稱為權利法案。法案中大部分是對政府施加限制——規定聯邦政府所不能做的事
。結果,在一般情形下,這項法案也被解釋為適用於州玟府。既然幾乎各州都有一項權利
法案,或作為州憲法的一部分,或作為州憲法的修正案,因而可以正確地說,所有美國人
在全國各處均享受此類權利法案的保護,不受任何地方、州與聯邦政府的侵犯。
第二條修正案
紀律良好的民兵隊伍,對於一個自由國家的安全實屬必要;故人民持有和攜帶武器的權利
,不得予以侵犯。
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 219.70.216.104
→
04/17 22:53, , 1F
04/17 22:53, 1F
推
04/18 00:58, , 2F
04/18 00:58, 2F
推
04/18 01:16, , 3F
04/18 01:16, 3F
推
04/18 08:09, , 4F
04/18 08:09, 4F
推
04/18 09:35, , 5F
04/18 09:35, 5F
推
04/18 10:09, , 6F
04/18 10:09, 6F
推
04/18 22:13, , 7F
04/18 22:13, 7F