The US Constitution: What's the Point Anymore?

**Doc Holliday** · 01 Dec 2010, 05:26 PM

I guess because it's not mentioned specifically beside the Army and Navy?? The Air Force was put through by an Act of Congress which is permitted under the powers section I-8 and not limited by any means under I-9? I don't know where's he's going with this.

**Drewbacca** · 01 Dec 2010, 11:36 PM

Plus the AirForce always helps invent and test the coolest shit. And there were no airplanes back when the ol' document was crafted.

**RoleTroll** · 04 Dec 2010, 05:35 PM

The Air Force is part of the "Army" within the meaning of the Constitution. It used to be the Army Air Corps, after all. The only people I've heard say the USAF is unconstitutional are John Birch Society types.

**RoleTroll** · 04 Dec 2010, 05:37 PM

Originally Posted by Cheebs

So you support "It's too hard, fuck it" as a method of government? It would take one amendment to make it easier to amend the Constitution.

I'd support an amendment saying that no law passed by a majority of both houses of congress and signed by the president can be found unconstitutional. But there's no prospect of passing it. It might be just one amendment but the votes aren't there. A lot of people like having judges sit over us like a superlegislature.

**Andrew** · 04 Dec 2010, 09:20 PM

Originally Posted by RoleTroll

The Air Force is part of the "Army" within the meaning of the Constitution.

It's not, though. Yes, when it was the Army Air Corps, it fell under the Department of the Army in the same manner that the Marine Corps falls under the Department of the Navy. When President Truman created a separate Department of the Air Force, they became an independent branch of service having nothing to do with the Army.

That's not to say it's unconstitutional, just that it's not the same thing.

**Advocate** · 04 Dec 2010, 09:50 PM

The Marines are still under the Navy right, Squall?

**Andrew** · 04 Dec 2010, 10:05 PM

This is correct, although I wouldn't word it exactly like that in front of one.

**Drewbacca** · 05 Dec 2010, 02:13 PM

Originally Posted by RoleTroll

I'd support an amendment saying that no law passed by a majority of both houses of congress and signed by the president can be found unconstitutional. But there's no prospect of passing it. It might be just one amendment but the votes aren't there. A lot of people like having judges sit over us like a superlegislature.

This is such a stupid idea.