Been sufferring in DC the past three days

Hey guys- when I get back home to my computer I'll have some great posts, but one thing I wanted to post was when I went into the national archives building to see the constitution.

Besides the 5 security guards carrying revolvers standing throughout the room, I wanted to share something I never knew. Over by the Bill of Rights, there was an original document showing the edits made by the founders.

For the first amendment (on this document it was the 4th), it originally did NOT have "congress shall make no law", but at the end it had "shall not be infringed." in my mind that puts those statements on possibly the same level as far as meaning...

Also- the actual bill of rights was not in the order it is now...I knew they were originally in a different order, but I thought that was just during draft making. I'm wondering why this copy of the bill of rights was enshrined next to the constitution and declaration...? Any answers??


Thanks guys!

Also- I can't understand why or how it's possible for these places to ban gun possession on premesis?? I thought the constitution restrains the government??

hammer6 said:

SNIP I knew they were originally in a different order, but I thought that was just during draft making. I'm wondering why this copy of the bill of rights was enshrined next to the constitution and declaration...? Any answers??

Click to expand...

Because the real one is on-line at the archives website, and they can't figure out how to get it back?

I'll bet it has something to do with there being no actual copy of the Bill of Rights as written. As I understand it, there were not 10 Amendments. There was one Amendment with twelve articles submitted to the states for ratification. Only ten of the articles were ratified by the states. Any page that had all twelve articles can't be the "Bill of Rights" because it has two articles that were not ratified.


Interesting piece of history: the last amendment, the 27th Amendment, was among the first proposed back in 1789. It limits pay raises for Congress. It was one of those original twelve articles of amendment. One of the two that were not ratified in 1791. Some sharp fellow realized that several states did ratify it in the Founding period, and that it only had so many states to go before it would become operative. So, he got busy and worked on getting it pushed through in enough states. He realized he didn't have to start from scratch. You see, once a state ratifies it, that state's ratification counts forever. Even if a whole bunch of others don't ratify it. You don't start all over and re-submit it for ratification to every state. You can just pick up where it left off and try again even 200 years later.

Citizen said:

Because the real one is on-line at the archives website, and they can't figure out how to get it back?

I'll bet it has something to do with there being no actual copy of the Bill of Rights as written. As I understand it, there were not 10 Amendments. There was one Amendment with twelve articles submitted to the states for ratification. Only ten of the articles were ratified by the states. Any page that had all twelve articles can't be the "Bill of Rights" because it has two articles that were not ratified.


Interesting piece of history: the last amendment, the 27th Amendment, was among the first proposed back in 1789. It limits pay raises for Congress. It was one of those original twelve articles of amendment. One of the two that were not ratified in 1791. Some sharp fellow realized that several states did ratify it in the Founding period, and that it only had so many states to go before it would become operative. So, he got busy and worked on getting it pushed through in enough states. He realized he didn't have to start from scratch. You see, once a state ratifies it, that state's ratification counts forever. Even if a whole bunch of others don't ratify it. You don't start all over and re-submit it for ratification to every state. You can just pick up where it left off and try again even 200 years later.

Click to expand...

Well- then why is the second amendment about the RKBA when this document had the second amendment as something else...

hammer6 said:

Well- then why is the second amendment about the RKBA when this document had the second amendment as something else...

Click to expand...

The short story goes something like this:

Constitution submitted from convention to states for approval (ratification).

Lots of yammering about lack of bill of rights threatens to derail acceptance of constitution by states. This was a serious threat to the constitution even coming into existence.

James Madison, who did not want a bill of rights, gives in. Takes lists submitted by various states with suggestions on rights and other adjustments to constitution. Lists are about 200 items all combined. Madison culls list down to twelve articles.

Congress approves Madison's list of twelve articles. Sends list to each state for ratification. Some states approve all twelve articles, some states only approve ten articles. The list of articles that received approval from the necessary (3/4?) of states amounted to only 10 articles. Meaning only 10 of the twelve articles were approved by the number of states necessary to make them operative.

The original list of twelve articles was called an Amendment. The whole list was the Amendment. But, along the way somewhere the surviving 10 articles started being referred to as amendments. This may only be a semantics thing. If you called the right against quartering troops in homes Article Three, then everybody would be confused as to whether you were talking about the Supreme Court (Article Three of the Constitution itself) or quartering troops.

The first two articles of the original twelve were not approved. So, lop two off the top, and start numbering at original article three. Thus the original third article is now the 1A, and the original fourth article is now the 2A.