Source
Convicted Killer Gets Death Penalty in VA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hqEEyAPdtM
Constitution
Amendment 8-Cruel and Unusual Punishment
"no cruel or unusual punishments inflicted"
Connection
This video talks about how one man killed a guard that works at a hospital and a officer. After escaping form jail the man then killed those two people. Because of the fact that he was shooting aroung a school the school had to be closed for a while to be sure no one else would get hurt. After one of th victim's wife had an outburt in the court room the judge sentenced the man to a dealth penalty.
This relates to the eighth amendment because the death penalty is now a faster process of punishment. In the constitution it states that "cruel or unusual punishments should not be inflicted", which the death penalty is a cruel punishment. Before 2010 the dealth penalty was the hanging of people and as time progressed it became a faster process of killing someone. You are injecting the person with penthotal which is a lethal dose that is inside of your veins where they carry it all through out your body. The person being sentenced to death can also feel the pain of the poisonous. That is very cruel and unusual because you're putting someone through pain but also most people don't do that when killing someone.
The death penalty should be banished because not only does it take away someone's 8th amendment but it also takes away the 5th which is the right to have life. If the man who was once inprisoned then that means that it is the police officers faulty and they need to do their jobs better. The death penalty has changed over many years from people being hung which took them alonger time to die and now injections with needles. The injection won't killl them instantly but it will affect them as the sit there waiting for it to kick in. Also if the injection wasn't strong enough then the person has to be injected some more. People should have a sentence to life in jail.
Monday, September 20, 2010
Entry 9-Amendment 6
Source
Accused Serial Killer Ask For a New Lawyer At Hearing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxERswB6Z6A
Constitution
Amendment 6
"the right to have a lawyer"
Connection
This video shows a man who killed multiple women and had a caourt hearing. In his court hearing he asked the judge for a new lawyer because he didn't want the one he had. During his time in jail he told one of the inmates how he felt about killing women because it gave him pleasure. The judge denied giving the killer a new lawyer because she felt he didn't need one because he was already guilty.
This relates to the constitution because in the 6th amendment it says"you have the right to a counsel" meaning you have the right to have a lawyer represent you in court. In the video the killer confessed of killing seven women and although he did that he was still given a lawyer even though the judge knew he was guilty. The 6th amendment relates to the rights of the accused which are the rights you are given when you are charged for a crime. That is why before a police officer interrogates you they start saying "you have the right to remain silent anything you say or do......." They have to do this because you are a citizen of the United States so you are protected by the constitution and the Bill of Rights that are inside of it.
This amendment should be amended because broad. If someone killed multiple people then confessed to it the jury and judge already knows that he/she is guilty. When a lawyer is hired it wastes there time and everyone elses because of the fact that everyone already knows what will happen to the person. Lawyers should be appointed to people who actually are capable of being innocent instead of people who are not.
Accused Serial Killer Ask For a New Lawyer At Hearing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxERswB6Z6A
Constitution
Amendment 6
"the right to have a lawyer"
Connection
This video shows a man who killed multiple women and had a caourt hearing. In his court hearing he asked the judge for a new lawyer because he didn't want the one he had. During his time in jail he told one of the inmates how he felt about killing women because it gave him pleasure. The judge denied giving the killer a new lawyer because she felt he didn't need one because he was already guilty.
This relates to the constitution because in the 6th amendment it says"you have the right to a counsel" meaning you have the right to have a lawyer represent you in court. In the video the killer confessed of killing seven women and although he did that he was still given a lawyer even though the judge knew he was guilty. The 6th amendment relates to the rights of the accused which are the rights you are given when you are charged for a crime. That is why before a police officer interrogates you they start saying "you have the right to remain silent anything you say or do......." They have to do this because you are a citizen of the United States so you are protected by the constitution and the Bill of Rights that are inside of it.
This amendment should be amended because broad. If someone killed multiple people then confessed to it the jury and judge already knows that he/she is guilty. When a lawyer is hired it wastes there time and everyone elses because of the fact that everyone already knows what will happen to the person. Lawyers should be appointed to people who actually are capable of being innocent instead of people who are not.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Entry 8-Amendment 5
Source
Constitution
Amendment 5-Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Connection
This cartoon shows a house with kids as being America and two peopl where one is the government and the other is a developer. Then they have a long car with a license plate saying eminent domain. The developer is sayin "I smell an opportunity here. I'll take that land." It is talking about how America was the place where there was advancement/success until the government came in. When the government came in and took over the paid for the land which made it eminent domain.
It connects to the constitution because in Amendment 5 it states that " nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Meaning that the governement or state can not come in and take over your land with out paying you for it. That's why the long car has eminent domain on it because the government goes around paying people for private property so that they can build something different on the land. In the constitution it also says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,"(natural rights) so someone can't take someone's else's property from him/her. In the picture the developer says "I see and opportunity", so he is going to try and talk the United States into giving up their land and he thinks it just may work because the U.S. is like little children.
Eminent domain is a good way of negotiating things over with people. Because of the constitution no one can take away of your property. Although they can't take it away they can still try to talk you into selling it for a certain price. John Locke states that people have the right to defend their life, liberty, and property which are natural rights. Liberty is the right to think on you own so when discussing eminent domain you have to use your mind more than what they are offering you.
Constitution
Amendment 5-Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Connection
This cartoon shows a house with kids as being America and two peopl where one is the government and the other is a developer. Then they have a long car with a license plate saying eminent domain. The developer is sayin "I smell an opportunity here. I'll take that land." It is talking about how America was the place where there was advancement/success until the government came in. When the government came in and took over the paid for the land which made it eminent domain.
It connects to the constitution because in Amendment 5 it states that " nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." Meaning that the governement or state can not come in and take over your land with out paying you for it. That's why the long car has eminent domain on it because the government goes around paying people for private property so that they can build something different on the land. In the constitution it also says "nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,"(natural rights) so someone can't take someone's else's property from him/her. In the picture the developer says "I see and opportunity", so he is going to try and talk the United States into giving up their land and he thinks it just may work because the U.S. is like little children.
Eminent domain is a good way of negotiating things over with people. Because of the constitution no one can take away of your property. Although they can't take it away they can still try to talk you into selling it for a certain price. John Locke states that people have the right to defend their life, liberty, and property which are natural rights. Liberty is the right to think on you own so when discussing eminent domain you have to use your mind more than what they are offering you.
Entry 7-Amendment 4
Source
Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's house raided, computers seized (updated) April 26, 2010
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/gizmodo-editor-jason-chens-house-raided-computers-seized-updated/6730
Constitution
Amendment 4
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause"
Connection
This article is about policemen that searched a journalists house. Before doing this they were issued a warrant and soon after that they went into the house taking computers for evidence. Judges feel that the journalist is protected by the first amendment of the constitution but also the police are protected by the fifth amendment. He is protected because Jason Chen is a journalist meaning he has the freedom of speech. All of will cause problems which will then lead to deeper investigations.
This connects to the constitution because the policemen had a warrant before they entered into Jason Chen's house. It ties back into the fourth amendment where it states "the right of the people to be secure.....shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue upon probable cause". If the police had just searched the journalist's house with out a warrant then they would be in the wrong. Also the police had to state in the warrant what needed to be seized just like in the fifth amendment, "describe the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized". This tells that if a policeman raids a house then they have to say what or who they are raiding the house for and a judge has to approve. This amendment can relate to checks and balances because before the policemen can even go into the house they have to be given permission to do so.
This is a good amendment but it can be improved. Although some policemen go and get warrants some do not which causes problems. It causes problems because they go into people's houses with out a warrant present and the only punishment they are given is suspension. If people are protected by the constitution then there should be harsh punishments because their things are being destroyed and they are the only ones left to clean it up. We should all have equal punishment/rights.
Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's house raided, computers seized (updated) April 26, 2010
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/gizmodo-editor-jason-chens-house-raided-computers-seized-updated/6730
Constitution
Amendment 4
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause"
Connection
This article is about policemen that searched a journalists house. Before doing this they were issued a warrant and soon after that they went into the house taking computers for evidence. Judges feel that the journalist is protected by the first amendment of the constitution but also the police are protected by the fifth amendment. He is protected because Jason Chen is a journalist meaning he has the freedom of speech. All of will cause problems which will then lead to deeper investigations.
This connects to the constitution because the policemen had a warrant before they entered into Jason Chen's house. It ties back into the fourth amendment where it states "the right of the people to be secure.....shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue upon probable cause". If the police had just searched the journalist's house with out a warrant then they would be in the wrong. Also the police had to state in the warrant what needed to be seized just like in the fifth amendment, "describe the place to be searched, and the person or things to be seized". This tells that if a policeman raids a house then they have to say what or who they are raiding the house for and a judge has to approve. This amendment can relate to checks and balances because before the policemen can even go into the house they have to be given permission to do so.
This is a good amendment but it can be improved. Although some policemen go and get warrants some do not which causes problems. It causes problems because they go into people's houses with out a warrant present and the only punishment they are given is suspension. If people are protected by the constitution then there should be harsh punishments because their things are being destroyed and they are the only ones left to clean it up. We should all have equal punishment/rights.
Monday, September 13, 2010
Entry 6-Amendment 10
Source
California's Gay Marriage Ban Extended August 16, 2010
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/16/californias-gay-marriage-ban-extended/
Constitution
Amendment 10 "powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution nor prohibited.....are reserved to the states respectively"
Connection
This article is about people in California that cannot marry someone of the same sex. People feel that they should not be able to marry because it is "protecting" them as individuals. They think it is protecting them because people who are against same sex marriage with assault some who is a gay/lesbian. It also states prop 8 which is proposition 8 (California's Marriage Rights). The court is trying to decide what would be best for everyone both the gays/lesbians and the people who are against it.
In the Constitution it states that "the powers not to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states". This means that if something is not inside of the constitution then the states have the right to make up their own laws. Inside of California they made a law stating that same sex marriage is banned. The state is able to do this because inside of the constitution there is no amendment or article dealing with marriage. John Locke stated that people are entitled to "natural rights" which are life, liberty, and property. Liberty means that a person should be able to behave on his/her personal responsibilty/free will. Loving someone is apart of liberty because you decide on your own to want to be with that person or not.
If you fall in love with someone and want to spend the rest of your life with him/her you should be able to. With all relationships, problems occur but it only makes your relationship stronger and better. Taking away someone's natural rights are like making them a slave. Not being able to marry same sex will force people to marry someone of the opposite sex and have affairs with his/her other mate which then causes people to get hurt. This may all be avoided if they take the ban off of same sex marriage.
California's Gay Marriage Ban Extended August 16, 2010
http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/08/16/californias-gay-marriage-ban-extended/
Constitution
Amendment 10 "powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution nor prohibited.....are reserved to the states respectively"
Connection
This article is about people in California that cannot marry someone of the same sex. People feel that they should not be able to marry because it is "protecting" them as individuals. They think it is protecting them because people who are against same sex marriage with assault some who is a gay/lesbian. It also states prop 8 which is proposition 8 (California's Marriage Rights). The court is trying to decide what would be best for everyone both the gays/lesbians and the people who are against it.
In the Constitution it states that "the powers not to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states". This means that if something is not inside of the constitution then the states have the right to make up their own laws. Inside of California they made a law stating that same sex marriage is banned. The state is able to do this because inside of the constitution there is no amendment or article dealing with marriage. John Locke stated that people are entitled to "natural rights" which are life, liberty, and property. Liberty means that a person should be able to behave on his/her personal responsibilty/free will. Loving someone is apart of liberty because you decide on your own to want to be with that person or not.
If you fall in love with someone and want to spend the rest of your life with him/her you should be able to. With all relationships, problems occur but it only makes your relationship stronger and better. Taking away someone's natural rights are like making them a slave. Not being able to marry same sex will force people to marry someone of the opposite sex and have affairs with his/her other mate which then causes people to get hurt. This may all be avoided if they take the ban off of same sex marriage.
Entry 5-2nd Amendment
Source
Funny and Jokes
Constitution
Amendment 2
"the right of the people to bear arms"
Connection
This political cartoon is saying that when you are questioned for having a gun then you are automatically protected. You are by the Constitution 2nd Amendment giving you the right to bear arms. There is a police officer that is talking to a citizen of the United States. The citizens is telling the officer how he has the right to bears arms because of the constitution. As he is saying this he is holding up the constitution to the police officer.
It clearly shows you how it relates to the constitution by having the United States Constitution appear. The citizen in the car has a permit to have a gun. In the constitution it specifically states "right of the people to bear arms", meaning that if you are issued a permit then you have the right to carry a gun. It also says "shall not be infringed" meaning that it shouldn't be violated. When someone has a handgun they are protected by the U.S. Constitution second amendment.
This amendment is respectable because it allows people to protect themselves. Although it allows that the amendment should be amended because the constitution gives anyone with a permit the right to bear arms. Peoples safety becomes threaten because people who sale guns sale them to people without permits and citizen have to exit their house worrying about someone trying to rob them with a gun. Also children are in danger when they find their parents guns hidden someone around the house and use it when they are playing cop and robbers. Amendment 2 should be amended so peoples will feel and be safer.
Funny and Jokes
Constitution
Amendment 2
"the right of the people to bear arms"
Connection
This political cartoon is saying that when you are questioned for having a gun then you are automatically protected. You are by the Constitution 2nd Amendment giving you the right to bear arms. There is a police officer that is talking to a citizen of the United States. The citizens is telling the officer how he has the right to bears arms because of the constitution. As he is saying this he is holding up the constitution to the police officer.
It clearly shows you how it relates to the constitution by having the United States Constitution appear. The citizen in the car has a permit to have a gun. In the constitution it specifically states "right of the people to bear arms", meaning that if you are issued a permit then you have the right to carry a gun. It also says "shall not be infringed" meaning that it shouldn't be violated. When someone has a handgun they are protected by the U.S. Constitution second amendment.
This amendment is respectable because it allows people to protect themselves. Although it allows that the amendment should be amended because the constitution gives anyone with a permit the right to bear arms. Peoples safety becomes threaten because people who sale guns sale them to people without permits and citizen have to exit their house worrying about someone trying to rob them with a gun. Also children are in danger when they find their parents guns hidden someone around the house and use it when they are playing cop and robbers. Amendment 2 should be amended so peoples will feel and be safer.
Entry 4-Amendment 1
Source
To Build or Not to Build:American Muslims, the Rise of Bigotry and Religious Intolerance September 13, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omid-memarian/to-build-or-not-to-build_b_715055.html
Constitution
Amendment 2
"congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Connection
This article is about how someone wanted to build a Mosque in New York two blocks away from Ground Zero. Because of what happened on September 11, 2001 this idea is causing debates. Some people feel that this shouldn't happen because they feel Muslims are the reason for the lives that were lost. Then there are another group of people who believe that you can't blame all Muslims/Arabs for what one/two people did. Pastor Jones wanted to burn the Quran in order to punish American Muslims for something that they all are not responsible for.
This relates to the Constitution because it gives you the freedom to practice whatever religion that you believe in. As long as you pay for the property you want then you are able to turn it into what you want it to be. The people who are telling them that they can't build the mosque are taking away the Muslim's first amendment which is freedom of religion. Although the people against the mosque are not following the constitution they are still protected by it because also in the first amendment you have the freedom of speech (Amendment 1 "or abridging the freedom of speech").
There is no problem with building the mosque but they should reconsider on building it not close to ground zero. Building it that close will only cause problems between the people inside of New York. For example the mosque can get burned down by people who are against it or Arab Americans can be assaulted on their way to or from the mosque. By the constitution they have the right to believe in their religion but also the people against have freedom of speech. To keep people safe the location of the mosque should be reconsidered.
To Build or Not to Build:American Muslims, the Rise of Bigotry and Religious Intolerance September 13, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/omid-memarian/to-build-or-not-to-build_b_715055.html
Constitution
Amendment 2
"congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Connection
This article is about how someone wanted to build a Mosque in New York two blocks away from Ground Zero. Because of what happened on September 11, 2001 this idea is causing debates. Some people feel that this shouldn't happen because they feel Muslims are the reason for the lives that were lost. Then there are another group of people who believe that you can't blame all Muslims/Arabs for what one/two people did. Pastor Jones wanted to burn the Quran in order to punish American Muslims for something that they all are not responsible for.
This relates to the Constitution because it gives you the freedom to practice whatever religion that you believe in. As long as you pay for the property you want then you are able to turn it into what you want it to be. The people who are telling them that they can't build the mosque are taking away the Muslim's first amendment which is freedom of religion. Although the people against the mosque are not following the constitution they are still protected by it because also in the first amendment you have the freedom of speech (Amendment 1 "or abridging the freedom of speech").
There is no problem with building the mosque but they should reconsider on building it not close to ground zero. Building it that close will only cause problems between the people inside of New York. For example the mosque can get burned down by people who are against it or Arab Americans can be assaulted on their way to or from the mosque. By the constitution they have the right to believe in their religion but also the people against have freedom of speech. To keep people safe the location of the mosque should be reconsidered.
Friday, September 10, 2010
Entry 3-Judicial
Source
Supreme court takes gun case that will test reach of 2nd Amendment
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/01/nation/na-supreme-court-guns1
Constitution
Article 3, Section 2
"in all the other cases before mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction."
This article is about how the handgun law was banned inside of different states. The supreme court said that it violated the Constitution because in the constitution people are allowed to carry handguns. Although they said that, citizens feel that they are in danger because people that are in gangs are able to carry guns. Others though, believe that guns are needed for self defense in case anyone tries to hurt them. Just because they ban them federally it doesn't mean that they will ban it on the local level.
In connects to the constitution because it states that the supreme court has the right to review lower courts cases. Only very important cases go into the supreme court for ruling on how it relates to today. Before the supreme court reviewed it a court underneath went over the law and felt that it should be taken into a higher court. After trying multiple times, the supreme court will decide if they want to review the case or not. Supreme court justice officials are taking the power that the constitution gives them and uses it to intepret laws.
This law is wrong because it defeats the person of protection. Although some people may need to protect their selves they don't use it in the right way. For example, people who are involved in gangs carry guns around with them. With the guns that they carry they use it to their advantages against other like robbing someone. The United States Constitution should amend that law.
Supreme court takes gun case that will test reach of 2nd Amendment
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/01/nation/na-supreme-court-guns1
Constitution
Article 3, Section 2
"in all the other cases before mentioned, the supreme court shall have appellate jurisdiction."
This article is about how the handgun law was banned inside of different states. The supreme court said that it violated the Constitution because in the constitution people are allowed to carry handguns. Although they said that, citizens feel that they are in danger because people that are in gangs are able to carry guns. Others though, believe that guns are needed for self defense in case anyone tries to hurt them. Just because they ban them federally it doesn't mean that they will ban it on the local level.
In connects to the constitution because it states that the supreme court has the right to review lower courts cases. Only very important cases go into the supreme court for ruling on how it relates to today. Before the supreme court reviewed it a court underneath went over the law and felt that it should be taken into a higher court. After trying multiple times, the supreme court will decide if they want to review the case or not. Supreme court justice officials are taking the power that the constitution gives them and uses it to intepret laws.
This law is wrong because it defeats the person of protection. Although some people may need to protect their selves they don't use it in the right way. For example, people who are involved in gangs carry guns around with them. With the guns that they carry they use it to their advantages against other like robbing someone. The United States Constitution should amend that law.
Entry 2- Executive
Source
Obama Declares an End to Combat Mission in Iraq
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/01/world/01military.html?scp=5&sq=obama%20iraq&st=cse
Constitution
Article 2 section 2-Civilian power over military, cabinet, pardon powers, appointments
"the president shall be commander and chief of the army and navy of the United States"
This article is talking about how Barack Obama talked to the Prime minister of Iraq about stopping the seven year war. Because of the fact that troops have been gone for a long time they are being killed and injuried. Inside of the United States Barack Obama feels that this country is having problems of its own that need to be taken care of. Not only are they getting hurt but this war is not free, the United States has spent a lot of money. He is demanding that they be brought home and Iraq will have to deal with their problems by their selves.
It connects to the U.S. constitution because it clearly states that the president has power over the military. Because of the fact that he is the chief of the military and navy he gets to decide when the troops should be removed from war. Also as president he wanted to tell the world the decision that he made. Barack Obama is using the power that he has by taking the troops from Iraq before it becomes any worse.
This is a good article because we are fighting a war that we should not be. Every day troops are being killed inside of Iraq and family members are being told that they have lost someone dear to them. I am tired of seeing on the news that one more troop died. If they are just brought home and we mind our own business then we won't have to deal with that. The president will play a good role in ending this horrible war.
Obama Declares an End to Combat Mission in Iraq
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/01/world/01military.html?scp=5&sq=obama%20iraq&st=cse
Constitution
Article 2 section 2-Civilian power over military, cabinet, pardon powers, appointments
"the president shall be commander and chief of the army and navy of the United States"
This article is talking about how Barack Obama talked to the Prime minister of Iraq about stopping the seven year war. Because of the fact that troops have been gone for a long time they are being killed and injuried. Inside of the United States Barack Obama feels that this country is having problems of its own that need to be taken care of. Not only are they getting hurt but this war is not free, the United States has spent a lot of money. He is demanding that they be brought home and Iraq will have to deal with their problems by their selves.
It connects to the U.S. constitution because it clearly states that the president has power over the military. Because of the fact that he is the chief of the military and navy he gets to decide when the troops should be removed from war. Also as president he wanted to tell the world the decision that he made. Barack Obama is using the power that he has by taking the troops from Iraq before it becomes any worse.
This is a good article because we are fighting a war that we should not be. Every day troops are being killed inside of Iraq and family members are being told that they have lost someone dear to them. I am tired of seeing on the news that one more troop died. If they are just brought home and we mind our own business then we won't have to deal with that. The president will play a good role in ending this horrible war.
Entry 1-Legislative
Source
State tax:Illinois
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/state-taxes-illinois.aspx
Constitutional connection
Section 8-Power of Congress
Clause 1-Power to tax and spend
"the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, impost and exercises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence...."
In the state of Illinois, there are many tax laws such as; liquor taxes, gasoline, etc. The taxpayers pay 3 percent of their income. The sales tax is 6.25% and citizens also pay taxes for the property that they own, but this law is a local law and not a state one because of the word federalism. Federalism is the divided power between member units. They are continuously changing these percentages every year.
This article relates to the constitution because it is giving people in power the ability to tax others. They are able to tax others in order to provide for the common defence and welfare. Without taxation the world may go back to the way that is was when there were the 13 colonies. If it returned back to the 13 colonies there would be no steady income or the same printed money for all of the states. With no steady income the United States would not be able to afford things that is needed such as medical supplies, weapons, etc.
I don't like the fact that people should be taxed. If you work for your money why should you have to give a percentage of it up. Not only do you give the government your money but also the tax rates increase every year depending on your job occupation. Then some businesses they fool you into thinking that something is one price but that is before sales tax. I would just like to see taxation to decrease instead of increase.
State tax:Illinois
http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/state-taxes-illinois.aspx
Constitutional connection
Section 8-Power of Congress
Clause 1-Power to tax and spend
"the congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, impost and exercises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defence...."
In the state of Illinois, there are many tax laws such as; liquor taxes, gasoline, etc. The taxpayers pay 3 percent of their income. The sales tax is 6.25% and citizens also pay taxes for the property that they own, but this law is a local law and not a state one because of the word federalism. Federalism is the divided power between member units. They are continuously changing these percentages every year.
This article relates to the constitution because it is giving people in power the ability to tax others. They are able to tax others in order to provide for the common defence and welfare. Without taxation the world may go back to the way that is was when there were the 13 colonies. If it returned back to the 13 colonies there would be no steady income or the same printed money for all of the states. With no steady income the United States would not be able to afford things that is needed such as medical supplies, weapons, etc.
I don't like the fact that people should be taxed. If you work for your money why should you have to give a percentage of it up. Not only do you give the government your money but also the tax rates increase every year depending on your job occupation. Then some businesses they fool you into thinking that something is one price but that is before sales tax. I would just like to see taxation to decrease instead of increase.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)