Do you believe the Bill of Rights is outdated and should be either dropped in its entirety or at least rewritten?

To be fair, LT Miller and MSgt Weston... you are BOTH appallingly ignorant regarding the intend purpose, nature, and origin of a document you have sworn a solemn oath to support and defend...without mental reservation of purpose of evasion.

The Bill of Rights is an affirmation by the Republic of certain Natural Rights which already exist by nature of our existence...rights enjoyed by ALL MEN (i.e. human beings) by virtue of our Creator (as discussed in the Unanimous Declaration of the United States adopted 4 July 1776).

If you feel so strongly regarding your very mistaken notion that you are mere mercenaries serving a privileged elite (as your expressed opinions presuppose), then perhaps you -- LT Miller -- should resign your commission, and MSgt Weston, you should depart the service as soon as your enlistment expires.

As for your education concerning the Constitution, Lieutenant, you should be aware that the roots of your ignorance are grounded in a series of historical text books written around the turn of the 20th century by a handful of "historians" who remade US history into a complete work of fiction which has since echoed the hallowed halls of academia without question despite the fact that these "historians" provided only a few cherry-picked citations of original source documentation to support such wild claims as "the founders were all a bunch of Diests, that our origins were purely based on commercial considerations (taxation without representation), et al.

My American History professor lied to me, too, but I actually bothered to research the subject myself...using unfiltered, original source documentation.

Maj, first of all the need to state the LT should resign or I should depart the service was totally out of line and very unprofessional. Secondly, I am retired. Do I understand the intent of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution I have swore to uphold a defend, your damned right. Yes it is a document that state each person natural rights and rights for fair representation, et al. These opinions of our are just that opinions. There was no reason for your blatant disrespect or perceived notion since that we are in anyway against the forefathers of our great nation. If you believe that we are in error of our opinion, I suggest you state where we are a little off versus the immediate assault you stated. I am open for discussions and learning truth, if you know something or learned something how about sharing without insult.

MSgt (Ret) Weston... In as much as your oath was solemn and you may be subject to recall to uphold it (by virtue of your retirement pay), then it is incumbent upon you to understand your errors. However, -- aside from my other postings in this thread which should prove sufficient to articulate your (and the good gentleman's) errors concerning the subject -- it is not incumbent upon me to explain these errors in further detail (unless of course you are prepared to send me your tuition check for the education you would receive...and cherish).

Rather, I would encourage you to research for yourselves -- in much the same way that I have done. Otherwise, you should be satisfied that I bothered to point out the fraudulent source of your errors.

Contrary to your opinion, I have not issued a single, unprofessional word nor insult towards either of you. I have very respectfully rebuked both of you as honorable peers, and have assigned you with the same capacity of intellectual, rational thought that I possess (thus the use term ignorance as opposed to stupidity). I have even laid the blame for your error largely upon those who presume themselves your superiors by hiding the Truth from you. Indeed, I have appealed to your individual senses of honor to either redact your oaths which -- as evidenced by your own admissions -- you each took with at least some degree mental reservation, or provide yourselves the education necessary withdraw your reservations. If you regard that as an insult, MSgt (Ret), then perhaps I may have been too hasty in my assessment?

Finally, MSgt (Ret) Weston, I appreciate your very candid feedback, which indicates to me that you are the very kind of NCO I value working with most of all... Thank you for your service.

Correct, if we are not happy as it is, then WE have a process to fix it.

TSgt Jones, the first ten amendments to the Constitution have not yet been amended. Even if they were amended -- or even repealed -- that would NOT change the underlying fact that these first ten amendments are an acknowledgement of EXISTING Natural Rights possessed by all humans -- the right to Life (and the means to defend it), Liberty (to say and do what one OUGHT to do as a sovereign, self-governing person), and the pursuit of happiness (regardless of its form or fashion -- everything from one's right to worship their Creator, associate with those whom they chose to associate with, and to accumulate, maintain, and dispose of personal wealth and property by the sweat of one's personal labors and risked investment).

There is a reason Thomas Jefferson wrote the word "unalienable" when referring to these rights. Merely removing those expressed in the Constitution does not automatically make them "alienable."

SPC Roy Baez-Gordils I was and still am totally opposed to any member of the military, Active, Retired, or Veteran, having to take a Concealed Carry Class in order to get a PERMIT to carry concealed. The entire idea goes against the 2nd as far as I am concerned and is just another way to get my name in a data base. Having said that, I'm Finally biting the bullet and taking the damn class. BTW in NC I can open carry without a permit - it is just a hastle.

Here in N.Y. they are a bunch panzies when it comes c.c.l

I rather be safe and tactical

SGT Glenn, the technology may have changed, but the nature and rights of the individual remain unalienable.

The principles contained within the Constitution are a reflection of unchangeable, immutable, and self-evident Natural Laws. Therefore, the principles contained within the Constitution remain timeless.

Much of the trouble we have today with the bloated, over-extended Federal bureaucracy can be traced to amendments added to the Constitution which undermined the delegative authority of the States OVER the Federal government (if you doubt which level of government has precedence over the other, I direct your attention to the Tenth Amendment and ask you who delegates to whom: Does the superior delegate authority to the subordinate or does that work the other way around?

In as much as we have seen the dire, abusive consequences of making certain changes to the Constitution which undermined the authority of the States over the Federal Government (most notably the 17th Amendment which removed the power of State Legislators to pick Senators to protect State Government interests) -- for the sake of "modernizing" the Constitution -- one must contemplate the inevitable catastrophe which would overtake us were we to allow changes which undermine individual authority over the Federal government.

The troubles we have today did not result from a 200-plus year old charter; rather our troubles are a result of a conscious and collective deviation from the spirit and letter of that charter.

Save the restoration of certain foundational principles amended out of the Constitution, We do not require a change to our charter. Indeed, we need to ADHERE to it -- in the original letter and spirit that the Framers intended.

I concur 100%...well said !!!

Why fix something that is not broke?

MSG Daniel Talley, I agree. No. No. No. And finally, Yes! When my Goddaughter posed her question Initially, I thought it was a very good point and needed to be brought to RP for discussion and debate. I am very heartened by the response by the response by the members of this forum. Debate has been lively with the majority in total support of the BOR and a very small percent expressing a very articulate counterpoint.

What he said !!!! no no no and yes !!!!!!

Connecticut may soon have thousands of Felons since they have passed a law in April 2013 that outlaws any unregistered "assault weapon or magazine that holds more than 10 rounds." People had until December 31, 2013 to register or become felons.

Remember that the best part of the BOR is the ability to question our government, including the Constitution and all of its Amendments. In fact, it is even encouraged.

Sure, but what you are in effect doing is questioning your right to question your rights. Now that's just silly.

The founders made sure that we had these rights through the BOR. We continue to ensure they are enforced; I, state your name, do solemnly swear or affirm that ...

CW2 (Join to see) i could not agree more Sir. It is the States Rights V Fed Government argument all over again. Article 10 is very clear about the issue, yet SCOTUS seems to not understand this at all. My rights in NC are no the same as your rights in AR in all respects.

The Bill of Rights is a timeless recognition of unalienable rights that have existed since creation. They are a reflection of the Laws of Nature and Nature's God. These rights and the Law they are based upon exist apart from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Merely repealing them or attempting to diluting them through executive orders, legislation, and/or judicial decisions cannot change the unchangeable, immutable Truth. Anyone who proposes to tamper with them is effectively guilty of sedition and mutiny.

The BOR is under constant attack from all directions and needs to be defended. there is chatter every few years to have a Constitutional Convention, yet it never seems to happen since the document stands the test of time so well.