Letter: Lawyers not subjected to constitution as founders wanted, he says
TO THE EDITOR: I was happy to see my question on open/conceal carry presented to the incumbent and the opponent for the Pierce County DA's position.
Both their answers had deficiencies.
First, the DA is also supposed to uphold the constitution of this state and of the United States. Remember, the Constitution gives us neither the right to bear arms nor the right of free speech. It affirms these rights, endowed by the creator, which already exist and prohibits them from being infringed upon.
The other problem is related to Mr. O'Boyle's answer. He states in part: "The laws at issue in this question are presumed to be constitutional upon enactment by our legislature, unless declared unconstitutional by the Wisconsin or United States Supreme Court."
The above answer illustrates the fact that lawyers and others in the legal system have not been subjected to the constitution as the founders would have wanted them to. That is why they do not always recognize when a law violates the constitution.
An example is the zoning laws. When a city can throw a Bible study leader in jail in Phoenix, Ariz., because he has broken the zoning laws regarding a large gathering (but the city has allowed large booze and binge parties just down the road) they have violated the sacredness of property according to the founders and violated the free exercise clause of the first amendment: "...or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"...
They have also discriminated against Christians. I don't think they would have shut down a Moslem, Hindu or Buddhist study groups.
The bill of rights--in this case, the second amendment of the US Constitution--and article 1 section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution cannot be declared unconstitutional by any court. They have to be amended by the citizens via a process.