Go to ground.news/tpe to compare media coverage to allow you to think critically about the news you consume. Subscribe through my link for less than $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only. #sponsored #ad
I feel like what people forget about the first amendment is that it protects you from the government, not individuals. So people disagreeing with you or banning you for not following the rules is not taking away your free speech.
What kind of dumbass do you have to be to think the 1st Amendment makes it illegal to disagree with people? That's the opposite of protecting free speech.
I hate/love so much that for nearly all of these amendments you could immediately follow up with 20 solid minutes of “and here’s how the government got around that and did it anyway”
You have the right to privacy except for this In section 5 a B7 of that random social media app that you picked up it says that we can look through your entire house and also scan your balls
The order of the 18th and 19th amendment are hilarious to think about. In order to “improve social condition” they were like “alright let’s not be hasty here, before we give women the right to vote…have we tried completely outlawing alcohol??”
Except it isn't surprising at all. Prohibition was a large component of early women's suffrages movements amidst other things such as education and prison reform. Prohibition was favored by many feminists because it represented a violent household, the drunken father/husband, the drunkard on the street, etc. Feminists across the board pushed for prohibition and its passage into legislation further paved the path for women's right to vote as a whole.
The temperance movement. There was no social safety net they thought that alcohol caused abusive partners and a great lot of sin. Even got to the point where the makers of harder alcohol Lobby in favor of that Amendment because they thought it would only apply to beer. Little did they know they would be hoisted up by their own petard
Prohibition and Suffrage actually went hand in hand. It was considered unacceptable for women to go out and protest regarding their rights, but demanding action about drunk husbands or domestic abuse as the result of alcohol was fine. If anything, prohibition led to suffrage, and suffrage led to prohibition.
*Now there is a happy little fantasy. I don't contest the necessity & usefulness, but ultimately the Golden Rule will win out.* *You **_do_** know the golden rule, don't you?* *_HE WHO HAS THE GOLD MAKES THE RULES!_*
@@zigzag321go 🤔 I can't take credit; I learned it from the Disney film aladdin, before that it was a line of dialogue from The Fall of the House of Usher by Edgar Allan Poe.
Well on top of that, if you are locked up but not convicted your demand for a speedy trial may fall on deaf ears for awhile before it makes it to the proper channels. After that they can still hold you for 60 days before that trial happens... unless they find a reason to delay it, which they can do. The 60 days itself is enough to completely derail someone's life if they are innocent and have nobody to bail them out.
@@diegolopesme people dissapear if they talk about too much politics and about the governement. There is a limit in this society you just shouldnt go down too much in the rabbit hole.
The first amendment also forbids the government from establishing religion. It’s literally the first clause. I don’t know why people keep skipping over that. “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of religion, or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for redness or grievances.
It’s because the video is 8 minutes long and for entertainment. Anyone trying to actually learn about the US constitution from a video like this is a moron.
And yet the Republicans want America to be a Christian country. No way in hell that would fly. If they wanted to live in an official Christian country, they can go live in El Salvador, Argentina, Brazil or Belarus
There were 12 Amendments proposed by the first Congress, which ten of them were ratified very soon and became the first to the tenth Amendments. One of the two pending amendments was rediscovered and ratified lately and became the 27th Amendment. This is because when these first 12 Amendments were proposed, the founding fathers forgot to set a time limit of when they need to get enough states ratification or they will be failed, hence the 27th Amendment, first proposed in 1789, was approved in 1992, it took 202 years, 7 months and 10 days to be ratified. The Congressional Apportionment Amendment is the other amendment that is still in the state of "approved by the Congress, awaiting ratification by states" it had been ratified by 11 states, last time by Kentucky in 1792. For the current 50 states of the US, this Amendment will require 27 more states to ratify it.
dude seriously. and until today i didnt even know the 22nd to 27th amendments even existed at all and really only knew the 13th-15th and 18th and 21st ones. oh and the 1st one
The Third Amendment is the reason the grievances it addresses are _historical._ Old as the Bill of Rights may be, it continues to protect us with just as much vigor as it ever did.
There were lawsuits against our government recently on the grounds of the government violating the 3rd amendment by making it illegal to remove occupants from your property during the pandemic. One of the only times the 3rd amendment was ever used legally.
@@kidfox3971 The First Amendment is the one that protects our other rights, not the Second. Without speech, assembly, and petition, you will be powerless when the government decides to take the Second Amendment away from you through legislation. As important as the Second Amendment is, people tend not to measure it up to the First Amendment properly. The First Amendment is the single most powerful sentence ever written into law.
@@kidfox3971 ...I am baffled that RUclips saw fit to auto-delete my reply to you. I guess discussing the importance of the first amendment is off the table.
Here's a list of ideas you could try :) All: Martial Arts Explained Religions explained Generations Explained MBTI types/ Big five types explained Manipulative tricks explained Cognitive functions explained Love languages explained X-Men/superpowers explained Movie Tropes explained Lightsabers explained Mental disorders explained
Stated in the constitution already but it varies on what elected government positions you are in that’s why the Supreme Court for example doesn’t have term limits because they are not elected and I agree that the people enforcing the laws of the constitution should not be elected because it would just end up being judges that are very partisan and corrupt just like politicians are but I do think they should have term limits of at least 30 years or so though
How about this... One term. wait one term before you can run again this way they have 2 year to collect campaign funds and won't need to get tax payers money.
Indeed and we think that Free Speech only applies to defense of the government. I'm sorry but the idea of free speech goes far beyond the First Amendment
i'm sure everyone's got some quip they want to add to a few of these amendments and how they are presented here, but I'll just focus on one - the 17th direct election of senators did not add anything to democracy - the people had always had a house of congress to which they directly elected representatives. Rather the 17thA removed the constitutional condition that senators were appointed by state legislatures. Why does this matter? Well, think of this - why do we have 2 houses of congress, if basically they only differ in their size, length of term, and salaries? The purpose of a bicameral congress, and why certain powers and responsibilities were assigned to either the house or the senate, was so that both the people AND the states would have a representative on the federal level. The 17thA destroyed the states' ability to have representation in D.C., neutered the 2 house of congress, and muddied people's understanding of the role of their rep vs their senator to this very day.
I disagree with your assessment first because as an American I do understand how the two bodies differ in function and their respective roles, and I would be very reluctant to allow somebody else to select my state senator for me.
@@edwardpoe7323 The representatives in the Senate were not intended to represent the people, not directly; they were intended to represent the interests of the state at large, thus their appointment. This was to balance the House of Representatives, where the people are directly represented. This check and balance was intended to keep states with large populations, say New York, Florida, or California, from completely domineering the political landscape and ignoring the interests and problems of say, Rhode Island, Idaho, or Wyoming.
@matthewpursley5788 yeah sure you're a actually read Jefferson rather than listening to newt gingriches bullshit about Jefferson. You should try doing the same
No it’s about suing states in federal court not suing states in general and states have to abide by the constitution so if you sue a state let’s say for example on an unconstitutional search warrant the state would have to abide by the federal laws required in their constitution so taking them to federal court would do nothing really and states would still have to enforce federal laws in their own courts
No it’s not. I learnt all of the first 10 amendments plus a few more within a week in the school system. I’ve memorized every one and I wasn’t even in school when we went over them in class.
Sometimes it amazes me what we were able to get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states to agree on. I wonder if we as a country are too polarized now to pass another amendment in my lifetime.
Amendments aren't ratified often if you really think about it. 10 amendments were added at 1 time. 3 amendments were added in the immediate aftermath of the civil war. 1 amendment was simply to overturn another amendment. Not to mention America is almost 250 years old.
It's not so much polarization that no Amendment will pass again. It's due to the fact the Amendments nearly everyone can agree upon. Are Amendments that would actively "harm" sitting legislators. 87% of Americans support Congressional term limits, 79% support an age cap on federally elected officials, and 74% favor placing a mandatory retirement age on Supreme Court Justices. All three of those would be Amendments Congress, regardless of Party, has an active interest in making sure never get ratified. And the only way any Amendments will ever be made to the Constitution again would be via an Article V Convention. Which 19 of the 34 needed states have already passed resolutions calling for one. North Carolina passed a resolution in the House last year. And if it ever passes the Senate they'll be state number 20. Edit: Numbers came from Pew Research
@SteveSherman-ij5gm The Constitution was a piece of shit right from the start. I don't get people who claim it was inspired by God. The very document that proclaims that all men are born with inalienable rights that cannot be taken away then proceeds to take it away for slaves and women. The document prohibits the U.S. from having a standing military (thus, the Second Amendment's necessity to be able to raise a militia), yet we've had one for many years through a dubious legal loophole. Inspired by God, indeed.
no we will never have any more amendments because USA is too polarized rn both sides have to work together for that to happen and that is not happening.
You missed a major point about the 2nd ammendment, it also provides that the people are allowed to use their firearms againsy a tyrannical Govt. If the need arises.
Yup. I stopped taking him seriously the moment he mentioned “muh voting rights the republicans wont talk about!!1!1” and started shilling his news platform.
As an independant, I find alot of this guy's content to be very good, I wonder if he will take the time to chime in on this and fill us in on his opinion?
@@theorangeheadedfella Considering they were pretty much fighting against what they called tyranny, it's not shocking. The 1st amendment exists to allow you to live without fear of government oppression The 2nd amendment exists to ensure that the 1st is followed.
Correction for the explanation of the 2nd amendment: The second amendment guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms, and the states right to maintain a militia ("well regulated" is antiquated language that means something entirely different today). The individual right is not earmarked by "recreation, hunting, defense". It is an unlimited right. The 2nd presumptively protects everything from knives and computer viruses, to tanks and fighter jets (supported by various founding documents, particularly in reference to privateers and privately owned battleships). The 2nd also presumptively protects the carriage of said arms, provided you are not carrying them in a manner (as outlined in the common law of Northampton, one of many founding documents) that is dangerous and unusual, as in a manner which would reasonably create fear of great bodily harm. The constitution, in particular the 2nd, does NOT disbar peoples rights based on immigration status, criminal history, or any other reason. The 2nd does NOT allow for delays in the exercise of the right, as outlined by the language "shall not be infringed" There is more nuance here, but I want to keep this as short as possible.
Isn't it true that "the common law of Northampton", although often cited, when research has drilled down deeply (and anything firearms/Second Amendment related is usually of intense interest), there is no "there" there? That the source document cannot be located or confirmed? If so, then the citation itself is invalid. If anything, confirming this is the case -- maybe by a simple "despite diligent research, we have been unable to confirm the oft-cited 'common law of Northampton' is a legitimate and true citation; that we have found no evidence that it existed within recognized scholarship." NYSRPA vs. Bruen, Heller, and McDonald would experienced far fewer interpretive perversions if Northampton's legitimacy had been challenged early on.
You blew your own foundational argument when you tried to cherry pick the well regulated militia language saying it means something completely different today. Using your logic all you can have is a flintlock. Dismissed
@@edwardpoe7323 Not only is the individual right to keep and bear arms separate from the states right to maintain a ‘well regulated’ militia, but your technological argument falls flat on its face when considering semiautomatics like the Ghiradoni rifle and repeating arms like the Pickle Gun existed well before the time of the founding. The well regulated militia of the time period was *literally* any able bodied gun owner, and during early America, as part of maintaining said militia, local governments would survey local gun owners to ensure they had a rifle capable of firing the caliber of ball that the local armory stored (typically .50 or .55 I think) in the event the ‘well regulated militia’ (any able bodied gun owner) was needed to rise. This is not cherry picked, go read DC v Heller. As for supporting recognized founding documents, see below "I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788 "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of." - James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788 "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789 "...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..." - James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788 “A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788 "What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." - Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789 "[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist." - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788
@@zaurakdigis "well regulated militia" is antiquated language that literally refers to every able bodied gun owner. I literally posted primary sources. Also every right enumerated in the constitution is unlimited. Point to me where it says "but sometimes" in any of the amendments.
One that clearly confuses a lot of people is the 6th. Judging by the number of bodycam videos where someone thinks they have the right to know what they're being arrested, detained, or just pulled over for. They don't. There's no obligation for them to tell you until your court date, technically.
I heard that California changed the law not too long ago, at least to a certain extent; officers pulling you 9ver have to give you the reason for which they're pulling you over
@@orlandomoreno6168 In Devenpeck v. Alford, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that although it's certainly "good police practice" to let a suspect know the reason for his arrest when taken into custody, there is no constitutional requirement to do so. They don't have to tell you, but if they arrest you, they have until they question you to read your Miranda rights. However, anything said before is inadmissible in court, which is why they say it the moment of arrest because most people say dumb shit during an arrest.
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm Except that the Constitution clearly states that all people are born with rights, which it immediately violated by treating Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, and Women as non-human.
It was talking about all people. Back then, majority of the world didn't regard certain races as humans. Blacks weren't regarded as humans and same with American Indians.
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm Each and every right creates a limitation for others Like the proverb goes "My liberty stops where the liberty of somebody else's begins"
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm Like Rousseau said, "The law is a reflection of the general opinion" There's a balance to be struck between individual freedoms and general interests
It’s the foundation for our country to work and to help preserve individual rights, liberties and freedoms. Every country should adopt a constitution that outlines the rights of their citizens in my opinion.
We need a _28th Amendment:_ Repeal the _27th Amendment._ People should want to become Politicians because the want to serve and help *The People,* not for a Job or financial incentive.
In theory, because this rarely is the case, imagine a working-middle class person who runs for and becomes and elected official, how are they supposed to feed their families? Not allowing senators to have a salary would only mean rich people get elected… which is basically true now lol
I think it would be interesting to link the wage’s of elected officials, with the minimum wage, since it would encourage them to raise it, but I am not sure of the specific’s.
@@leikosakuray Increasing the minimum wage isn’t an effective measure for reducing poverty and usually results in jobs being harder to acquire and generalized price increases
Thanks for covering the 2nd Amendment. My daughter’s high school civics teacher wouldn’t let her class discuss the 2nd Amendment. She didn’t want to trigger anyone. 🥴How did we get here?
I love how easy to understand this is! I also love how you go through each one and explain it concisely, and how the video is chaptered, so whenever I wanna look one up, I can just come back here. Thank you.
This is such a garbage video. It breaks my heart that people watch entertainment like this acting like it’s actually informative. This country just produces imbeciles while other countries have their elementary students learn calculus. The west is collapsing.
One of my adult education teachers back in Saint Louis served in the military and talked about how if you're old enough to serve in the military and die for your country then you should be able to drink. After a few years I honestly think this is a very grey topic. You should have the freedom to drink if you are old enough to be in the military but there's an undeniable fact that eighteen year olds in general are pretty stupid and could get into trouble given the opportunity.
i honestly think that 21 is too young for anything given that science has proven that the human brain is NOT full matured until the age of 26. i would be OK if the age for everything gets bumped up to that age for that reason
@@rustyrodgers7566 means you have the right to freely associate with who you choose. For example you can't be forced to be in a political party, company, organization etc. And reserve the right to join whatever organization you want. Only exceptions includes duties to the state like conscription and country citizenship
@@minddevastation508 it doesn't say tyrannical government, the founding fathers said that plenty but the 2nd Amendment doesn't spicifically say that. Its implied in the phrase "free state" meaning a free state rather than a tyrannical state, but it doesn't actually say tyrannical.
The 4th amendment has been effectively removed, at least in my state. Police can search your car during a traffic stop without your permission or a warrant. All they have to say is they 'smelled weed' or 'thought something was suspicious'. Things that can't be proven or disputed when watching body cameras
26th amendment- lowers the voting age, due to recognition of maturity Alcohol, some firearms, and tobacco laws- raised to 21 due to recognition of immaturity
I was at a retirement seminar and the speaker spoke on how he quit his job after he made well over $950,000 PROFIT within 3months he invested $120,000. I just need creative ideas to afford my retirement.
Michelle Kenner concept is key in beating all odds to excel in this form of online commodity. Her management team is quite impressive so far! With SUK made a profit of over $28,863 weekly.
Yes I Agree, I've been talking to Michelle Laurine Kenner for long now, mostly because I lack the knowledge and energy to deal with these ongoing market circumstances. there are more aspects of the market than the average individual is aware of. Having an investing counselor is now the best line of action, especially for those who are close to retiring.
A good number of people discredit the effectiveness of financial advisors, but over the past 2 years l've had an advisor consistently restructure and diversify my portfolio/expenses and I've made over $3million in gains... might not be a lot but i find myself secured financially.
@@BB-rh2ml'shall not be infringend' pretty simple text irl too. >inb4 its just militia's If you are an able-bodied male citizen between 17 and 44 you are automatically part of a militia. On top of this the amendement doesnt specify that you NEED to be in one, it just says 'people'.
I will say, Bravo to Gound News, this was the 3rd video in a row (from different creators and different topics) that had a Ground News ad...almost got me
@0:25 huge little note on the 2A.... something i am kinda sad was done. The 2A does NOT say it is for self defense or hunting, it just says it is a right. It doesn't say WHY. or put restrictions, it just says it is. So 2A is NOT for hunting, or self defense or anything else. It is for whatever the fuck you want it to be :)
It was specifically for the people to have insurance to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. But the founding fathers also recognized the right to self defense
The 9th Amendment is so over looked. Whenever some states that is not a Constitutional right, or something along hose lines, point them to the 9th Amendment.
The constitutional journey outlined here is a fascinating narrative of the fundamental principles that underpin the United States. From the First Amendment, a guardian of individual freedoms, to the nuanced complexities of the 18th Amendment attempting social improvement through prohibition, each step reveals the evolving landscape of American ideals. The inclusion of the 19th Amendment, a beacon for gender equality, and the 26th Amendment, recognizing the civic responsibility of younger adults, showcase the nation's commitment to inclusivity and democratic participation. The commentary on media coverage and the importance of diverse perspectives adds a contemporary layer, emphasizing the ongoing relevance of these constitutional pillars. It's not just a historical account; it's a reflection of the enduring pursuit of justice, liberty, and equality.
THE RULES: #1: you can talk #2: you can have guns #3: the military can't visit without permission #4: we can't visit without permission #5: you can shut up #6: trials are fair #7: random people decide your fate #8: punishments are fair #9: there are rules not on this list #10: if we don't have it, yall do #11: cant sue us #12: we are on different ballets #13: chores are illegal #14: if your born here you belong here #15: if you belong here, you vote #16: yay taxes #17: yall vote senators #18: no beer #19: women can vote #20: we start and end at this time #21: disregard rule 18 #22: you cant be president forever #23: if you live in the capital you can vote #24: you don't need to pay to vote #25: if one cant do it, another can #26: you need to be 18 to vote #27: pay changes are delayed
I doubt you could find any ideology that is actually content with our current state of things. But the real scary thing about fascism is that it is a laterally-centrist philosophy, which is what caused it to be picked up so easily by all of the younger university students back in the 1920s.
@@MarcTelangthe 2nd Amendment doesn't give people their rights, its a ban on government from making any laws infringing on what is supposed to be an inalienable right.
ok this is the limit, this is something that the police don't even have and you want random people to have it, there is no situation where this would be useful except for mass murder, what do you think will happen? you think there will be a zombie apocalypse trying to break down your door? when would you need a machine gun? i would say all these replies are a joke but i don't think that is true anymore given the number. at least some people are saying it unironically. a century from now people will be complaining that the right to have a nuclear bomb is an "inalienable right"
You messed up in a very fundamental way on the First Amendment. We are a Republic, not a Democracy. The Founders *loathed* democracies, just read their own words. That's also why Article IV Section 4 exists.
Important note, while you were describing the first amendment you mistakenly labled the government type as a Democracy. We are not a Democracy, we are a Republic type government, sometimes reffered to as a Constitutional Republic.
And that really doesn't work even in theory anymore. How would a group of armed hillbillies rise up against the US military or solve systemic issues in a corrupt government?
@@LamirLakantry because 100 million people with a gun is more dangerous than the 2 million soldiers, most of which would not follow the unconstitutional orders … silly idiot
@@NearDaBeach A barely organized small malisia against the US military. Good luck. If that's how you think political change should happen then you're a sad individual.
@@LamirLakantry did I say that’s how to influence change? No. It’s a last resort for when the government starts crossing the line. And do you understand that this country was born from farmers with make shift weapons fighting a superior military, outnumbered, outgunned, and out supported? Don’t be dumb
And here I am watching this and checking the boxes of every one of the rights we're supposed to have that are being willfully and openly violated right now today, quite openly and enthusiastically by the current "regime." I'm a particular fan of the 4th amendment, since the IRS now uses AI to snoop on my bank account, accessing my private financial documents right now today without a warrant or probable cause. A runner up would have to be the 8th amendment where Trump supporters at J6 were held in jail in conditions that would be considered cruel and unusual for up to 18 months pending trial before being sentenced to literally _years_ more in prison for the "crime" of walking through a public building while the police watched and escorted. It's a twofer, with both the 6th and 8th amendment violations being openly cheered by half the country. I could go on. I'm well past the point of childhood naivete about "rights." Rights exist only as long as government agrees to uphold them. And if the gov't chooses not to, it's the gov't's job to stop it (great plan! They investigated themselves and found they did nothing wrong!).
Isn't it interesting that the Amendments moved further away from protecting individual liberties and more toward "what you can't do" or "what the government can do"? Almost as if our Founding Fathers knew how a tyrannical government gets its power...
Just a friendly reminder: "-- DISCLAIMER -- Do not use this video as your only source of information. This video is for entertainment/edutainment purposes, and some information could be too oversimplified or incorrect. This channel's goal is to spark your curiosity and let you do your own research on these topics." Just so no one starts to bash ThePainterExplainer over the head for something they decided to cover.
The Founding Fathers had absolutely no idea how easily the modern world would find loopholes and workarounds for all of these. Poor George had the best intentions, but it's hard to have hindsight for what the next 250+ years will be like.
Go to ground.news/tpe to compare media coverage to allow you to think critically about the news you consume. Subscribe through my link for less than $1/month or get 40% off unlimited access this month only. #sponsored #ad
Ok
I use ground news and it is great. Great sponsor integration.
4th amendment got wrong icon in right top corner 😡
you forgot the h in eighth
Love your videos!💚
I feel like what people forget about the first amendment is that it protects you from the government, not individuals. So people disagreeing with you or banning you for not following the rules is not taking away your free speech.
Especially if its a private entity.
What kind of dumbass do you have to be to think the 1st Amendment makes it illegal to disagree with people? That's the opposite of protecting free speech.
Thank you. Everyone should get this.
Unfortunately this comment won’t teach them this because they can’t read.
That's why it's a part of the Bill of Rights
I hate/love so much that for nearly all of these amendments you could immediately follow up with 20 solid minutes of “and here’s how the government got around that and did it anyway”
FR
You have the right to privacy except for this
In section 5 a B7 of that random social media app that you picked up it says that we can look through your entire house and also scan your balls
@@How_To_Drive_a_TARDISexcept for the entire existence of the CIA, FBI, NSA, etc
The 13th amendment even states how they got around in the amendment itself.
@@How_To_Drive_a_TARDIS TikTok in a nutshell
Allowing a foreign app to collect frightening amounts of data on people...
Great job guys 👍
Rule 18: No drinking or selling alcohol
Rule 21: Nvm
😂
That’s actually how I remember them! In the US, you’re an adult at 18, but can’t drink. You can however, drink at 21
@@ECunninghamdamn thats gonna be remembered forever thanks to that
@@ECunningham THANKS, thats ingrained in my brain forever now xD
@@ECunninghamsame with smoking
The order of the 18th and 19th amendment are hilarious to think about. In order to “improve social condition” they were like “alright let’s not be hasty here, before we give women the right to vote…have we tried completely outlawing alcohol??”
Except it isn't surprising at all. Prohibition was a large component of early women's suffrages movements amidst other things such as education and prison reform. Prohibition was favored by many feminists because it represented a violent household, the drunken father/husband, the drunkard on the street, etc. Feminists across the board pushed for prohibition and its passage into legislation further paved the path for women's right to vote as a whole.
The temperance movement. There was no social safety net they thought that alcohol caused abusive partners and a great lot of sin. Even got to the point where the makers of harder alcohol Lobby in favor of that Amendment because they thought it would only apply to beer. Little did they know they would be hoisted up by their own petard
@@memesarekeem man I _know_ , just let me get these jokes off. I’m saying the order of it is hilarious lol especially out of context
Every amendment date:
First Amendment - December 15, 1791
Second Amendment - December 15, 1791
Third Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eleventh Amendment - February 7, 1795
Twelfth Amendment - June 15, 1804
Thirteenth Amendment - December 6, 1865
Fourteenth Amendment - July 9, 1868
Fifteenth Amendment - February 3, 1870
Sixteenth Amendment - February 3, 1913
Seventeenth Amendment - April 8, 1913
Eighteenth Amendment - January 16, 1919
Nineteenth Amendment - August 18, 1920
Twentieth Amendment - January 23, 1933
Twenty-First Amendment - December 5, 1933
Twenty-Second Amendment - February 27, 1951
Twenty-Third Amendment - March 29, 1961
Twenty-Fourth Amendment - January 23, 1964
Twenty-Fifth Amendment - February 10, 1967
Twenty-Sixth Amendment - July 1, 1971
Twenty-Seventh Amendment - May 7, 1992
Prohibition and Suffrage actually went hand in hand. It was considered unacceptable for women to go out and protest regarding their rights, but demanding action about drunk husbands or domestic abuse as the result of alcohol was fine. If anything, prohibition led to suffrage, and suffrage led to prohibition.
Can't wait for the 28th amendment, which will put age limits on elected officials and term limits on congress.
*Now there is a happy little fantasy. I don't contest the necessity & usefulness, but ultimately the Golden Rule will win out.*
*You **_do_** know the golden rule, don't you?*
*_HE WHO HAS THE GOLD MAKES THE RULES!_*
@@HM2SGT I thought the Golden rule was do onto others whatever makes you the most money, but your Golden rule is better.
@@zigzag321go 🤔 I can't take credit; I learned it from the Disney film aladdin, before that it was a line of dialogue from The Fall of the House of Usher by Edgar Allan Poe.
That will never happen because they themselves will have to write it up and vote on it
The Democrats and career politicians will never write that one.
The American Legal System in a pirate voice "The 6th Amendment is more like guidelines than actual rules."
Geoffrey Rush delivered that line so bloody well, too. 💪😎✌️
"Ensures the right to a fair and speedy trial'
American Justice System: "Let's just ignore that last part... and maybe that first part too..."
That's better than the 9th and 10th amendments which were completely ignored right from the get go
Well, they give you the option of a fast trial, but no one wants that because they're more likely to be found not guilty if they don't take it
Well on top of that, if you are locked up but not convicted your demand for a speedy trial may fall on deaf ears for awhile before it makes it to the proper channels. After that they can still hold you for 60 days before that trial happens... unless they find a reason to delay it, which they can do. The 60 days itself is enough to completely derail someone's life if they are innocent and have nobody to bail them out.
We could really use another 30 minute video explaining all the ways the government gets around these and corporations exploit them
He would probably get outright banned from RUclips if he did that. Or just "disappear" the next day.
@@ShwappaJ uh can u tell me people that disappear because they made thid
@@diegolopesme people dissapear if they talk about too much politics and about the governement. There is a limit in this society you just shouldnt go down too much in the rabbit hole.
@@Akrmdz444 ok
Could you name a couple of your own personal favorite examples of the gov and companies exploiting the amendments?
The first amendment also forbids the government from establishing religion. It’s literally the first clause. I don’t know why people keep skipping over that.
“Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of religion, or of the press; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the government for redness or grievances.
The third clause should read, "or abridging the freedom of speech"
christians aren't exactly the smartest
It’s because the video is 8 minutes long and for entertainment. Anyone trying to actually learn about the US constitution from a video like this is a moron.
And yet the Republicans want America to be a Christian country. No way in hell that would fly. If they wanted to live in an official Christian country, they can go live in El Salvador, Argentina, Brazil or Belarus
There were 12 Amendments proposed by the first Congress, which ten of them were ratified very soon and became the first to the tenth Amendments. One of the two pending amendments was rediscovered and ratified lately and became the 27th Amendment. This is because when these first 12 Amendments were proposed, the founding fathers forgot to set a time limit of when they need to get enough states ratification or they will be failed, hence the 27th Amendment, first proposed in 1789, was approved in 1992, it took 202 years, 7 months and 10 days to be ratified. The Congressional Apportionment Amendment is the other amendment that is still in the state of "approved by the Congress, awaiting ratification by states" it had been ratified by 11 states, last time by Kentucky in 1792. For the current 50 states of the US, this Amendment will require 27 more states to ratify it.
The last Amendment you said, is no longer enforceable. It would have to go through the entire process again in order to pass.
I couldn't have imagined a better subject for you to break down. Imagine if all laws were this simply & transparently broken down
Every amendment date:
First Amendment - December 15, 1791
Second Amendment - December 15, 1791
Third Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eleventh Amendment - February 7, 1795
Twelfth Amendment - June 15, 1804
Thirteenth Amendment - December 6, 1865
Fourteenth Amendment - July 9, 1868
Fifteenth Amendment - February 3, 1870
Sixteenth Amendment - February 3, 1913
Seventeenth Amendment - April 8, 1913
Eighteenth Amendment - January 16, 1919
Nineteenth Amendment - August 18, 1920
Twentieth Amendment - January 23, 1933
Twenty-First Amendment - December 5, 1933
Twenty-Second Amendment - February 27, 1951
Twenty-Third Amendment - March 29, 1961
Twenty-Fourth Amendment - January 23, 1964
Twenty-Fifth Amendment - February 10, 1967
Twenty-Sixth Amendment - July 1, 1971
Twenty-Seventh Amendment - May 7, 1992
dude seriously. and until today i didnt even know the 22nd to 27th amendments even existed at all and really only knew the 13th-15th and 18th and 21st ones. oh and the 1st one
@SteveSherman-ij5gm I grew up a low iq'er, I can translate
"We have to pass the bill before we can read it" -Nancy Pelosi
Too bad this video is complete sh*t at explaining the nuance behind these laws.
The Third Amendment is the reason the grievances it addresses are _historical._ Old as the Bill of Rights may be, it continues to protect us with just as much vigor as it ever did.
Cops invade homes without warrants all the time. The 3a is not being effectively enforced
There were lawsuits against our government recently on the grounds of the government violating the 3rd amendment by making it illegal to remove occupants from your property during the pandemic. One of the only times the 3rd amendment was ever used legally.
Especially in the form of the second ammendment, it protects our lives and rights every day.
@@kidfox3971 The First Amendment is the one that protects our other rights, not the Second. Without speech, assembly, and petition, you will be powerless when the government decides to take the Second Amendment away from you through legislation.
As important as the Second Amendment is, people tend not to measure it up to the First Amendment properly. The First Amendment is the single most powerful sentence ever written into law.
@@kidfox3971 ...I am baffled that RUclips saw fit to auto-delete my reply to you. I guess discussing the importance of the first amendment is off the table.
Here's a list of ideas you could try :)
All:
Martial Arts Explained
Religions explained
Generations Explained
MBTI types/ Big five types explained
Manipulative tricks explained
Cognitive functions explained
Love languages explained
X-Men/superpowers explained
Movie Tropes explained
Lightsabers explained
Mental disorders explained
pretty sure they already did "generations explained..?"
someone else did religeons explained
all movie tropes would probably be a very long video but id be here for it
@@TOLOTTUNESATL probably just the biggest ones
@@pl0ks567 who?
28th Amendment: term limits on all publicly elected offices and on all bureaucratically held positions. How f****** hard was that.
This country (or should I say corporation) will destroy itself before that ever happens
Stated in the constitution already but it varies on what elected government positions you are in that’s why the Supreme Court for example doesn’t have term limits because they are not elected and I agree that the people enforcing the laws of the constitution should not be elected because it would just end up being judges that are very partisan and corrupt just like politicians are but I do think they should have term limits of at least 30 years or so though
How about this... One term. wait one term before you can run again this way they have 2 year to collect campaign funds and won't need to get tax payers money.
Term limits wont work, unfortunately corporation will just prop up the next person that will serve their interests, and it would cost them less too.
We already have term limits, it’s called voting kid! Smh..
This man does a better job explaining things than my college professors.
When he doesn’t get them wrong like his video about paradoxes
I ran the script through an ai detector and it came up as written by ai.
Depends on where you went to college.
they made me do this in 7th🙏
Except the video does nothing to explain the shortfalls of each and every amendment.
Always nice to see another Paint video
Every amendment date:
First Amendment - December 15, 1791
Second Amendment - December 15, 1791
Third Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eleventh Amendment - February 7, 1795
Twelfth Amendment - June 15, 1804
Thirteenth Amendment - December 6, 1865
Fourteenth Amendment - July 9, 1868
Fifteenth Amendment - February 3, 1870
Sixteenth Amendment - February 3, 1913
Seventeenth Amendment - April 8, 1913
Eighteenth Amendment - January 16, 1919
Nineteenth Amendment - August 18, 1920
Twentieth Amendment - January 23, 1933
Twenty-First Amendment - December 5, 1933
Twenty-Second Amendment - February 27, 1951
Twenty-Third Amendment - March 29, 1961
Twenty-Fourth Amendment - January 23, 1964
Twenty-Fifth Amendment - February 10, 1967
Twenty-Sixth Amendment - July 1, 1971
Twenty-Seventh Amendment - May 7, 1992
0:51 this hasn’t been a thing since October 26th, 2001.
"Request government changes without fear of retaliation"
Well that was one hell of a lie
Indeed and we think that Free Speech only applies to defense of the government. I'm sorry but the idea of free speech goes far beyond the First Amendment
Every amendment date:
First Amendment - December 15, 1791
Second Amendment - December 15, 1791
Third Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eleventh Amendment - February 7, 1795
Twelfth Amendment - June 15, 1804
Thirteenth Amendment - December 6, 1865
Fourteenth Amendment - July 9, 1868
Fifteenth Amendment - February 3, 1870
Sixteenth Amendment - February 3, 1913
Seventeenth Amendment - April 8, 1913
Eighteenth Amendment - January 16, 1919
Nineteenth Amendment - August 18, 1920
Twentieth Amendment - January 23, 1933
Twenty-First Amendment - December 5, 1933
Twenty-Second Amendment - February 27, 1951
Twenty-Third Amendment - March 29, 1961
Twenty-Fourth Amendment - January 23, 1964
Twenty-Fifth Amendment - February 10, 1967
Twenty-Sixth Amendment - July 1, 1971
Twenty-Seventh Amendment - May 7, 1992
From the government only
The government, with enough people signing it, will have to consider a petition.
@@8MinutesExplainer Okay?
What does this mean
Currently studying US history. This was pretty convenient, would have been nice to see when each amendment was made. Great video as always!
i'm sure everyone's got some quip they want to add to a few of these amendments and how they are presented here, but I'll just focus on one - the 17th direct election of senators did not add anything to democracy - the people had always had a house of congress to which they directly elected representatives. Rather the 17thA removed the constitutional condition that senators were appointed by state legislatures.
Why does this matter? Well, think of this - why do we have 2 houses of congress, if basically they only differ in their size, length of term, and salaries? The purpose of a bicameral congress, and why certain powers and responsibilities were assigned to either the house or the senate, was so that both the people AND the states would have a representative on the federal level. The 17thA destroyed the states' ability to have representation in D.C., neutered the 2 house of congress, and muddied people's understanding of the role of their rep vs their senator to this very day.
I came looking for this comment. Well said sir.
@@thewanderer7307 Same bro. Repeal the 17th amendment.
I disagree with your assessment first because as an American I do understand how the two bodies differ in function and their respective roles, and I would be very reluctant to allow somebody else to select my state senator for me.
@@edwardpoe7323 The representatives in the Senate were not intended to represent the people, not directly; they were intended to represent the interests of the state at large, thus their appointment. This was to balance the House of Representatives, where the people are directly represented. This check and balance was intended to keep states with large populations, say New York, Florida, or California, from completely domineering the political landscape and ignoring the interests and problems of say, Rhode Island, Idaho, or Wyoming.
@matthewpursley5788 yeah sure you're a actually read Jefferson rather than listening to newt gingriches bullshit about Jefferson. You should try doing the same
Thank you for providing us this important information in a quick and easy way!
The 11th amendment is so stupid, you can only sue a state if they agree to be sued.
Kansas, I'm suing you
Kansas: nu uh
And they cap any monetary judgment like false imprisonment...speedy trial is bs also...
No it’s about suing states in federal court not suing states in general and states have to abide by the constitution so if you sue a state let’s say for example on an unconstitutional search warrant the state would have to abide by the federal laws required in their constitution so taking them to federal court would do nothing really and states would still have to enforce federal laws in their own courts
@@Poopyhead304 the suing a state with federal law only became a part of the 11th amendment with torres vs texas department of public safety.
The 11th amendment is the constitutional equivalent of a software patch.
A 8 minute video is better than the US school system
no its not buddy
@@batsuitjoker yes it is
Every amendment date:
First Amendment - December 15, 1791
Second Amendment - December 15, 1791
Third Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fourth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Fifth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Sixth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Seventh Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eighth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Ninth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Tenth Amendment - December 15, 1791
Eleventh Amendment - February 7, 1795
Twelfth Amendment - June 15, 1804
Thirteenth Amendment - December 6, 1865
Fourteenth Amendment - July 9, 1868
Fifteenth Amendment - February 3, 1870
Sixteenth Amendment - February 3, 1913
Seventeenth Amendment - April 8, 1913
Eighteenth Amendment - January 16, 1919
Nineteenth Amendment - August 18, 1920
Twentieth Amendment - January 23, 1933
Twenty-First Amendment - December 5, 1933
Twenty-Second Amendment - February 27, 1951
Twenty-Third Amendment - March 29, 1961
Twenty-Fourth Amendment - January 23, 1964
Twenty-Fifth Amendment - February 10, 1967
Twenty-Sixth Amendment - July 1, 1971
Twenty-Seventh Amendment - May 7, 1992
No it’s not. I learnt all of the first 10 amendments plus a few more within a week in the school system. I’ve memorized every one and I wasn’t even in school when we went over them in class.
@@insertusername310 How do you learn about something in school if you weren't in school?
Sometimes it amazes me what we were able to get 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the states to agree on. I wonder if we as a country are too polarized now to pass another amendment in my lifetime.
Amendments aren't ratified often if you really think about it. 10 amendments were added at 1 time. 3 amendments were added in the immediate aftermath of the civil war. 1 amendment was simply to overturn another amendment. Not to mention America is almost 250 years old.
one side will eventually lose and we will achieve a new normal for the next 50 years until this happens again
It's not so much polarization that no Amendment will pass again. It's due to the fact the Amendments nearly everyone can agree upon. Are Amendments that would actively "harm" sitting legislators. 87% of Americans support Congressional term limits, 79% support an age cap on federally elected officials, and 74% favor placing a mandatory retirement age on Supreme Court Justices. All three of those would be Amendments Congress, regardless of Party, has an active interest in making sure never get ratified. And the only way any Amendments will ever be made to the Constitution again would be via an Article V Convention. Which 19 of the 34 needed states have already passed resolutions calling for one. North Carolina passed a resolution in the House last year. And if it ever passes the Senate they'll be state number 20.
Edit: Numbers came from Pew Research
@SteveSherman-ij5gm The Constitution was a piece of shit right from the start. I don't get people who claim it was inspired by God. The very document that proclaims that all men are born with inalienable rights that cannot be taken away then proceeds to take it away for slaves and women. The document prohibits the U.S. from having a standing military (thus, the Second Amendment's necessity to be able to raise a militia), yet we've had one for many years through a dubious legal loophole. Inspired by God, indeed.
no we will never have any more amendments because USA is too polarized rn both sides have to work together for that to happen and that is not happening.
You missed a major point about the 2nd ammendment, it also provides that the people are allowed to use their firearms againsy a tyrannical Govt. If the need arises.
He left that out on purpose because he doesn’t think it’s necessary. Shows his bias without even saying it
damn north america kinda nuts
Yup. I stopped taking him seriously the moment he mentioned “muh voting rights the republicans wont talk about!!1!1” and started shilling his news platform.
As an independant, I find alot of this guy's content to be very good, I wonder if he will take the time to chime in on this and fill us in on his opinion?
@@theorangeheadedfella Considering they were pretty much fighting against what they called tyranny, it's not shocking.
The 1st amendment exists to allow you to live without fear of government oppression
The 2nd amendment exists to ensure that the 1st is followed.
Correction for the explanation of the 2nd amendment:
The second amendment guarantees the individual right to keep and bear arms, and the states right to maintain a militia ("well regulated" is antiquated language that means something entirely different today). The individual right is not earmarked by "recreation, hunting, defense". It is an unlimited right. The 2nd presumptively protects everything from knives and computer viruses, to tanks and fighter jets (supported by various founding documents, particularly in reference to privateers and privately owned battleships). The 2nd also presumptively protects the carriage of said arms, provided you are not carrying them in a manner (as outlined in the common law of Northampton, one of many founding documents) that is dangerous and unusual, as in a manner which would reasonably create fear of great bodily harm. The constitution, in particular the 2nd, does NOT disbar peoples rights based on immigration status, criminal history, or any other reason. The 2nd does NOT allow for delays in the exercise of the right, as outlined by the language "shall not be infringed"
There is more nuance here, but I want to keep this as short as possible.
Isn't it true that "the common law of Northampton", although often cited, when research has drilled down deeply (and anything firearms/Second Amendment related is usually of intense interest), there is no "there" there? That the source document cannot be located or confirmed? If so, then the citation itself is invalid. If anything, confirming this is the case -- maybe by a simple "despite diligent research, we have been unable to confirm the oft-cited 'common law of Northampton' is a legitimate and true citation; that we have found no evidence that it existed within recognized scholarship." NYSRPA vs. Bruen, Heller, and McDonald would experienced far fewer interpretive perversions if Northampton's legitimacy had been challenged early on.
You blew your own foundational argument when you tried to cherry pick the well regulated militia language saying it means something completely different today. Using your logic all you can have is a flintlock. Dismissed
@@edwardpoe7323 Not only is the individual right to keep and bear arms separate from the states right to maintain a ‘well regulated’ militia, but your technological argument falls flat on its face when considering semiautomatics like the Ghiradoni rifle and repeating arms like the Pickle Gun existed well before the time of the founding. The well regulated militia of the time period was *literally* any able bodied gun owner, and during early America, as part of maintaining said militia, local governments would survey local gun owners to ensure they had a rifle capable of firing the caliber of ball that the local armory stored (typically .50 or .55 I think) in the event the ‘well regulated militia’ (any able bodied gun owner) was needed to rise. This is not cherry picked, go read DC v Heller. As for supporting recognized founding documents, see below
"I ask who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers." - George Mason, Address to the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 4, 1788
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of." - James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
"...the ultimate authority, wherever the derivative may be found, resides in the people alone..." - James Madison, Federalist No. 46, January 29, 1788
“A militia when properly formed are in fact the people themselves…and include, according to the past and general usuage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms… "To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." - Richard Henry Lee, Federal Farmer No. 18, January 25, 1788
"What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty .... Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins." - Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, I Annals of Congress 750, August 17, 1789
"[I]f circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist." - Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28, January 10, 1788
No right is unlimited, the 2nd is the only one that mentions regulation
@@zaurakdigis "well regulated militia" is antiquated language that literally refers to every able bodied gun owner. I literally posted primary sources.
Also every right enumerated in the constitution is unlimited. Point to me where it says "but sometimes" in any of the amendments.
One that clearly confuses a lot of people is the 6th.
Judging by the number of bodycam videos where someone thinks they have the right to know what they're being arrested, detained, or just pulled over for.
They don't.
There's no obligation for them to tell you until your court date, technically.
I heard that California changed the law not too long ago, at least to a certain extent; officers pulling you 9ver have to give you the reason for which they're pulling you over
In any reasonable country with habeas corpus properly applied, they have to tell you before you are in a cage. Maybe before you are cuffed too.
@@orlandomoreno6168 In Devenpeck v. Alford, the U.S. Supreme Court explained that although it's certainly "good police practice" to let a suspect know the reason for his arrest when taken into custody, there is no constitutional requirement to do so.
They don't have to tell you, but if they arrest you, they have until they question you to read your Miranda rights. However, anything said before is inadmissible in court, which is why they say it the moment of arrest because most people say dumb shit during an arrest.
@@gamer-vh9sh That's their internal SOP, no one is above the constitution.
@@chltmdwp the law isn't breaking any part of the constitution, wtf yoh mean? Like I hate Cali, but I am totally fine with that law.
Congress was 14 amendments in before they decided to specify who it was that they were granting rights to.
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm Except that the Constitution clearly states that all people are born with rights, which it immediately violated by treating Blacks, Native Americans, Chinese, and Women as non-human.
@@texaswunderkind Welcome to the United States of America
It was talking about all people. Back then, majority of the world didn't regard certain races as humans. Blacks weren't regarded as humans and same with American Indians.
@@texaswunderkindThats the Declaration of Independence
I could use this video a week ago I had my political science exam.
@Warnerus2005 86 I mixed up the 4th and 5th
@@jthemegaviru8681 Not that bad. Good job man.
@Warnerus2005 Yeah, there were multiple questions on the two
@@jthemegaviru8681 86% is still pretty good tho
Dang that’s rough
The founding fathers were absolutely cooking back in their day
I think it's important for people to learn what rights they have
And their responsibilities
you mean used to have. There are many exceptions to the first 10.
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm
Each and every right creates a limitation for others
Like the proverb goes "My liberty stops where the liberty of somebody else's begins"
@@SteveSherman-ij5gm
Like Rousseau said, "The law is a reflection of the general opinion"
There's a balance to be struck between individual freedoms and general interests
You should do a video on how the us breaks every one of these amendments
As someone who doesn’t live in america this is very useful
Stay where you're at and fix your own country.
@@VeNoM__007Rude
@@VeNoM__007same to you pal. Enjoy your private healthcare
@@constant249 only poor people complain and want everything free
@@VeNoM__007where is your family from? I'm sure it's not America 😂
As someone from poland who keeps seeing those thrown around on the internet, thanks for explaining them.
It’s the foundation for our country to work and to help preserve individual rights, liberties and freedoms. Every country should adopt a constitution that outlines the rights of their citizens in my opinion.
@@nickbono8 Most of the countries include that stuff as part of the constitution, including mine.
We need a _28th Amendment:_ Repeal the _27th Amendment._ People should want to become Politicians because the want to serve and help *The People,* not for a Job or financial incentive.
That's the point of it, if you vote to improve your own pay you don't get that increased pay unless you're elected for another term
In theory, because this rarely is the case, imagine a working-middle class person who runs for and becomes and elected official, how are they supposed to feed their families? Not allowing senators to have a salary would only mean rich people get elected… which is basically true now lol
I think it would be interesting to link the wage’s of elected officials, with the minimum wage, since it would encourage them to raise it, but I am not sure of the specific’s.
@@leikosakuray Increasing the minimum wage isn’t an effective measure for reducing poverty and usually results in jobs being harder to acquire and generalized price increases
except in everywhere it has been established
It should be mandatory to learn this in elementary, middle, and finally high school. 3 times.
👍it should be repeated in every grade. A simple version for the little kids, and each year adding more and more hystory lessons for each one.
Thanks for covering the 2nd Amendment. My daughter’s high school civics teacher wouldn’t let her class discuss the 2nd Amendment. She didn’t want to trigger anyone. 🥴How did we get here?
I love how easy to understand this is! I also love how you go through each one and explain it concisely, and how the video is chaptered, so whenever I wanna look one up, I can just come back here. Thank you.
IT HAS ERRORS , SALUDOS
This is such a garbage video. It breaks my heart that people watch entertainment like this acting like it’s actually informative. This country just produces imbeciles while other countries have their elementary students learn calculus.
The west is collapsing.
Amendment 18: no drinking alcohol.
Amendment 21: hold my beer
I'm not even from the US but yipee another ThePaintExplainer video
ALL government officials need to watch this daily. Then conduct their business based on these laws.
We must've forgotten any lessons from banning alcohol because we did the same exact thing with other drugs over the next century
Richard Nixon did that so they could lock up hippies
One of my adult education teachers back in Saint Louis served in the military and talked about how if you're old enough to serve in the military and die for your country then you should be able to drink. After a few years I honestly think this is a very grey topic. You should have the freedom to drink if you are old enough to be in the military but there's an undeniable fact that eighteen year olds in general are pretty stupid and could get into trouble given the opportunity.
Only solution is to raise the age limit.
i honestly think that 21 is too young for anything given that science has proven that the human brain is NOT full matured until the age of 26. i would be OK if the age for everything gets bumped up to that age for that reason
They vote blue, which is why they want 16 year olds to vote now...
Which is why lowering the voting age to 18 was stupid. The 26th Amendment should be repealed.
This guys videos taught me more than school has so far I love the straight up way he says things
I feel like every American should watch this video, just based off how little the average American knows about their own country.
I don't know why but I keep remembering that the First Amendment included an implied right to freedom of association
Through the right of assembly
What does that mean
@@rustyrodgers7566 means you have the right to freely associate with who you choose. For example you can't be forced to be in a political party, company, organization etc. And reserve the right to join whatever organization you want. Only exceptions includes duties to the state like conscription and country citizenship
@@rustyrodgers7566 It means that a Christian baker is not forced to sell cakes to gay couples.
@@Flyingclam oh ok
2nd amendment doesn't mention hunting. In it's place, it mentions against a Tyrannical government, and "It shall not be infringed upon."
It has been severely crippled by the feds and several states since 1934.
@@minddevastation508 it doesn't say tyrannical government, the founding fathers said that plenty but the 2nd Amendment doesn't spicifically say that. Its implied in the phrase "free state" meaning a free state rather than a tyrannical state, but it doesn't actually say tyrannical.
Literally either a lie or a flash of retardation. You can read the amendment for free online….
….assuming you can read
Awesome quick refresher everyone should see. Good job 👍🏿
The 4th amendment has been effectively removed, at least in my state. Police can search your car during a traffic stop without your permission or a warrant. All they have to say is they 'smelled weed' or 'thought something was suspicious'. Things that can't be proven or disputed when watching body cameras
It’s called probable cause and it’s existed long before cars existed.
The 10th is why Roe v. Wade was, correctly, struck down. Left to the individual states to decide.
26th amendment- lowers the voting age, due to recognition of maturity
Alcohol, some firearms, and tobacco laws- raised to 21 due to recognition of immaturity
this got me through a history test ngl
How
1:09 appears
Law by Mike: Let’s go!!!
This video was made fresh 🤌🏻🍲 perfect information in a fast and easy manner that anyone could understand. Nice work! ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
I was at a retirement seminar and the speaker spoke on how he quit his job after he made well over $950,000 PROFIT within 3months he invested $120,000. I just need creative ideas to afford my retirement.
I'll suggest that you work with a financial advisor who can help you. This is still a good time to invest in Gold, Silver and digital currencies ,ETH.
Michelle Kenner concept is key in beating all odds to excel in this form of online commodity. Her management team is quite impressive so far! With SUK made a profit of over $28,863 weekly.
Yes I Agree, I've been talking to Michelle Laurine Kenner for long now, mostly because I lack the knowledge and energy to deal with these ongoing market circumstances. there are more aspects of the market than the average individual is aware of. Having an investing counselor is now the best line of action, especially for those who are close to retiring.
A good number of people discredit the effectiveness of financial advisors, but over the past 2 years l've had an advisor consistently restructure and diversify my portfolio/expenses and I've made over $3million in gains... might not be a lot but i find myself secured financially.
HOW!! I know it's possible, I would appreciate if you show me how to go about it.
WE PASSIN THE CONSTITUTION EXAM WITH THIS ONE YO🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️🔥🔥🔥🔥
This is a great video, the only thing I'd add is the year the amendments were ratified. It can give greater context to these explanations.
Shout out to all the lesser known Amendments. We know you’re there for us. We’ll try to be there for you, too. 😂
That 2nd Amendment almost makes it sound like you're allowed to have a gun. I wonder if New York City knows about it.
That _is_ what the 2nd Amendment is.
@@nevaehhamilton3493 That *is* his joke
Simple conclusion from a simple explanation
@@BB-rh2ml'shall not be infringend' pretty simple text irl too.
>inb4 its just militia's
If you are an able-bodied male citizen between 17 and 44 you are automatically part of a militia. On top of this the amendement doesnt specify that you NEED to be in one, it just says 'people'.
@@temtem9255 "Well regulated" pretty simple text irl too.
I will say, Bravo to Gound News, this was the 3rd video in a row (from different creators and different topics) that had a Ground News ad...almost got me
The second Amendment doesn’t “allow” anything.
It restricts the governments ability to violate that right.
@0:25 huge little note on the 2A.... something i am kinda sad was done.
The 2A does NOT say it is for self defense or hunting, it just says it is a right. It doesn't say WHY. or put restrictions, it just says it is.
So 2A is NOT for hunting, or self defense or anything else. It is for whatever the fuck you want it to be :)
It was specifically for the people to have insurance to protect themselves from a tyrannical government. But the founding fathers also recognized the right to self defense
Reeeeeeeee!!!
This literally isn’t true. Complete wishful thinking and it’s why the phrase “well regulated” and “militia” are in the language of the amendment.
The 3a today is also about cops. During the 18th century the colonial police were the redcoats
28th amendment boutta go hard when it drop, trust.😤
The 9th Amendment is so over looked. Whenever some states that is not a Constitutional right, or something along hose lines, point them to the 9th Amendment.
This is going to be useful for my AP US history test tomorrow, thank you. I’ve been following you since you first showed up here.
You should try “every fundamental postulate and theorem of geometry”
That would be years long
@@JoeyCakes2008 good point
could do every circle theorem or their proofs
HELL YA SECOND AMENDMENT 🗣️🗣️🗣️🔥🔥🔥🔥🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
🔥🔥🔥
The constitutional journey outlined here is a fascinating narrative of the fundamental principles that underpin the United States. From the First Amendment, a guardian of individual freedoms, to the nuanced complexities of the 18th Amendment attempting social improvement through prohibition, each step reveals the evolving landscape of American ideals. The inclusion of the 19th Amendment, a beacon for gender equality, and the 26th Amendment, recognizing the civic responsibility of younger adults, showcase the nation's commitment to inclusivity and democratic participation. The commentary on media coverage and the importance of diverse perspectives adds a contemporary layer, emphasizing the ongoing relevance of these constitutional pillars. It's not just a historical account; it's a reflection of the enduring pursuit of justice, liberty, and equality.
The 5th amendment really needs to be properly explained to any suspect undergoing police interrogation before the interrogation begins.
Coming into this video already having memorized all of these
THE RULES:
#1: you can talk
#2: you can have guns
#3: the military can't visit without permission
#4: we can't visit without permission
#5: you can shut up
#6: trials are fair
#7: random people decide your fate
#8: punishments are fair
#9: there are rules not on this list
#10: if we don't have it, yall do
#11: cant sue us
#12: we are on different ballets
#13: chores are illegal
#14: if your born here you belong here
#15: if you belong here, you vote
#16: yay taxes
#17: yall vote senators
#18: no beer
#19: women can vote
#20: we start and end at this time
#21: disregard rule 18
#22: you cant be president forever
#23: if you live in the capital you can vote
#24: you don't need to pay to vote
#25: if one cant do it, another can
#26: you need to be 18 to vote
#27: pay changes are delayed
Rule 28 : disregard rule 19.
13 chores? Absolutely horrendous take
@@statusquo8958 Lol can't take a joke?
I love how we have gotten to the point where 90% of these are violated on a regular basis. Awesome video though.
It shows we live in a corrupt government but alas don't tell that to the fascists authoritarian right, they'll try to say it's perfect the way it is 😅
I doubt you could find any ideology that is actually content with our current state of things. But the real scary thing about fascism is that it is a laterally-centrist philosophy, which is what caused it to be picked up so easily by all of the younger university students back in the 1920s.
The most important is no doubt the 2nd amendment, you bear arms that you can use to protect and take back all your other rights. Repeal the NFA.
the nfa? Do you want average people to have MACHINE GUNS????
@@MarcTelangYes!
@@MarcTelangthe 2nd Amendment doesn't give people their rights, its a ban on government from making any laws infringing on what is supposed to be an inalienable right.
@@MarcTelangyes.
ok this is the limit, this is something that the police don't even have and you want random people to have it, there is no situation where this would be useful except for mass murder, what do you think will happen? you think there will be a zombie apocalypse trying to break down your door? when would you need a machine gun? i would say all these replies are a joke but i don't think that is true anymore given the number. at least some people are saying it unironically. a century from now people will be complaining that the right to have a nuclear bomb is an "inalienable right"
The 14th amendment needs to be changed to remove the punishment clause. This has been grossly abused by the prison industrial complex.
You messed up in a very fundamental way on the First Amendment.
We are a Republic, not a Democracy. The Founders *loathed* democracies, just read their own words.
That's also why Article IV Section 4 exists.
Important note, while you were describing the first amendment you mistakenly labled the government type as a Democracy. We are not a Democracy, we are a Republic type government, sometimes reffered to as a Constitutional Republic.
I think he's referring to democratic values, not necessarily a democratic government.
Absolutely loving these videos!
If our rights are so important, why weren't they included in the Constitution?
Why did they have to be "added" three years later?
*28th Amendment:* Must be legal U.S. Citizen to vote….and live here.
*Oh, wait….*
Yea?
There's always one jackass.
2nd amendment is less about personal defense and more about having a final check/balance against the government
And that really doesn't work even in theory anymore. How would a group of armed hillbillies rise up against the US military or solve systemic issues in a corrupt government?
@@LamirLakantry because 100 million people with a gun is more dangerous than the 2 million soldiers, most of which would not follow the unconstitutional orders … silly idiot
@@LamirLakantrylike if you honestly believe the people couldn’t beat the military, you are a sad sad individual
@@NearDaBeach A barely organized small malisia against the US military. Good luck. If that's how you think political change should happen then you're a sad individual.
@@LamirLakantry did I say that’s how to influence change? No. It’s a last resort for when the government starts crossing the line. And do you understand that this country was born from farmers with make shift weapons fighting a superior military, outnumbered, outgunned, and out supported? Don’t be dumb
And here I am watching this and checking the boxes of every one of the rights we're supposed to have that are being willfully and openly violated right now today, quite openly and enthusiastically by the current "regime." I'm a particular fan of the 4th amendment, since the IRS now uses AI to snoop on my bank account, accessing my private financial documents right now today without a warrant or probable cause. A runner up would have to be the 8th amendment where Trump supporters at J6 were held in jail in conditions that would be considered cruel and unusual for up to 18 months pending trial before being sentenced to literally _years_ more in prison for the "crime" of walking through a public building while the police watched and escorted. It's a twofer, with both the 6th and 8th amendment violations being openly cheered by half the country. I could go on. I'm well past the point of childhood naivete about "rights." Rights exist only as long as government agrees to uphold them. And if the gov't chooses not to, it's the gov't's job to stop it (great plan! They investigated themselves and found they did nothing wrong!).
18th: sorry man alcohol is banned
21st: nah fuck that it was a stupid idea
Feels like the government and ruling class violates all these amendments every single day
Exactly
2A - we have the right, and duty, to overthrow a tyrannical government.
Indeed.
Bro we need to use the 25th amendment right now!
And get Kamala? Fuck no
1A protects you from the government punishing your speech. It doesn't protect you from repercussions from citizens.
Isn't it interesting that the Amendments moved further away from protecting individual liberties and more toward "what you can't do" or "what the government can do"? Almost as if our Founding Fathers knew how a tyrannical government gets its power...
Almost as if our founding fathers declared their own independence and wrote it down for this very reason…
Good vid. My only criticism would be that had you added the year these were ratified would have added significant context
Just a friendly reminder:
"-- DISCLAIMER --
Do not use this video as your only source of information. This video is for entertainment/edutainment purposes, and some information could be too oversimplified or incorrect. This channel's goal is to spark your curiosity and let you do your own research on these topics."
Just so no one starts to bash ThePainterExplainer over the head for something they decided to cover.
If only people who watch videos like this for their personal edification could read.
So should we compile a list of all the channels based on or copying this one?
The Founding Fathers had absolutely no idea how easily the modern world would find loopholes and workarounds for all of these. Poor George had the best intentions, but it's hard to have hindsight for what the next 250+ years will be like.
Citation needed
Democracies always devolve and fail. Look at all of the hate speech laws being passed in so called “western” countries.
This could have been helpful for the amendments test I had a week ago...
...did you pass?
...did you pass?
...did you pass?
@@IrnestCODYeah I got a 100
19th amendment is what got us in the situation that we are in now.
Lmaoo
god bless america
Not making the amendment the FOURTH amendment the one about QUARTERING soldiers was a missed opportunity.
high school government classes gonna eat this vid up
It would appear those most rabid about supporting the US Constitution are the ones who cherry pick or know the very least about it.
What you mean? I tell every solider I see in uniform, “YOU ARE NOT GOING TO BE QUARTERED IN MY HOUSE!”
Source: Trust me bro
Incredibly important video
Remember patriots, the 2nd Amendment defends the 1st.