Which would be the first law you would undo if you could undo a law?

originally posted by: Kali74
Patriot Act.

I second this.

To add:

Repeal the NFA

Repeal ACA

Repeal All drug laws

All the money spent on these programs could help drug addicts get treatment, help poor people who turn to crime get educations, and help states tailor their healthcare programs to their actual needs rather than what the Feds want them to have.

a reply to: projectvxn

Good ones.

Would you replace the ACA with something else? Maybe single payer funded by the money saved from "the drug war?" Or just get back to how it was or something else?

Do you think what they do with addicts in the Netherlands works? Their policy in a nutshell is to reduce harm to people and at the same time reduce trafficking.

Why won't a candidate run on repealing laws ?

We have 1000's of useless outdated laws.

Seems like someone I could support.

The law of human limitation meaning we cannot engineer ourselves to be whatever we want, only corporations can create things which engineer us for example GMO foods.

Put that ability in the individuals hands to do what they want with themselves.

So in essence control over your own DNA, modify as you please all you want into whatever you want, whenever you want.

a reply to: whyamIhere

It would be a novel concept, wouldn't it? Maybe someone has done this and we don't know it.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

How about doing away with drivers licenses. Constitutionally it says we can own property and use it as we see fit. as long as we don't interfere with someone elses rights.The roads are free for ANYONE to use safely as public access and can be used in ANY conveyance of the day. Horse, car, etc......
A license is another freakin Tax, so get rid of all the other taxes too. LOL!!!
A piece of plastic does not make one a better driver. That is just ridiculous. Yes have training for new drivers, but a License? Really? A paper showing classes completed maybe, but something that one can lose, be jailed or imprisoned for not having is B.S.......
Sorry this turned into a rant instead of something simple. Syx.

I would say the one law would be....... the 14th amendment!

Getting rid of this one law would get rid if every law (code or statute) put in place since. This one law is what made the current private system of laws today. Without the 14th there would no longer be slavery or any of the other laws that have been and will be listed on this thread.

a reply to: SyxPak

Rant away, and I would tend to agree. But then how would the people we buy alcohol from know that we can buy it?

The funny thing is I was just typing up something also related to driving when I saw your post.

I think that if no one's around, you should be able to go through a red light (after stopping). And speed limits are just really bizarre in some places too. Okay...that one might be a personal issue. Thank the insurance lobby for at least one of those, I guess.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Men's rights.
Women have support groups and all kinds of stuff....men...meh nobody cares.
I'd make men and women legally equal with the same amount of programs for each.

a reply to: DrumsRfun
Which laws would you get rid of though? Do you think that there are laws that afford women more protection than men? Or?

But I do understand what you're saying. Like how it's next to impossible for a good father to get custody even if the mother is not that great a person?

a reply to: IncognitoGhostman

Now this is something I would need to read/hear more about.

The 14th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified on July 9, 1868, and granted citizenship to “all persons born or naturalized in the United States,” which included former slaves recently freed. In addition, it forbids states from denying any person "life, liberty or property, without due process of law" or to "deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

By directly mentioning the role of the states, the 14th Amendment greatly expanded the protection of civil rights to all Americans and is cited in more litigation than any other amendment.

Rid ourselves of the dreaded US Federal Reserve

a reply to: ~Lucidity

I would just make it a more even playing field.

But I do understand what you're saying. Like how it's next to impossible for a good father to get custody even if the mother is not that great a person?

Exactly.

If a woman broke my nose,she gets a small slap on the wrist because I am a big boy and can take it.
If I did the same I would go to jail...there is the problem.

a reply to: DrumsRfun

Ya know, I believe the laws are actually the same...it just seems for some reason the woman's word is more often taken than the man's. I know this firsthand because my sister actually used to abuse her husband...and every time it happened he was the one hauled away.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

We'd get ID's still, but it doesn't have to be a Driving ID! Ya know what I mean? As far as booze, I bought it age 15. Age then was 21 Illinois, 19 Iowa. Just walked into a bar and walked right out after paying. That was WAYYYYY back before they even gave dui's though. BAck in the 70's. I agree liquor should be for older people, but the young still get it Today! Given to them by someone, or fake ID's so......


ETA: I agree here with You!!!
"I think that if no one's around, you should be able to go through a red light (after stopping). And speed limits are just really bizarre in some places too."

a reply to: SyxPak

Okay...so still an ID. Got it. What you say is true. So many people just hunker down and pass the written and driving tests and then walk out the door and promptly proceed to forget everything they supposedly just learned anyway.

I would do away with the law that does not allow felons to vote.

If you do the crime and serve your time, you should have that right restored.

a reply to: ~Lucidity

Maybe single payer funded by the money saved from "the drug war?" Or just get back to how it was or something else?

Not at the Federal level.

I wish people would abandon the notion that single payer could work in the US. It can't.

We have 50 states each with 50 different economies, demographics, and health care needs. It's not something you can take a macroeconomic view of.

Reasonable cause/suspicion

16th amendment