In Honour of Lioness' Quest for Intelligent Dialogue... a question

[Coolville]

To those americans who took part in the interesting debate started by Lioness in Winter, I wish to pose a question that will 'hopefully' inspire a similar dialogue.

One hears so often Americans say things like, "The freeest country in the world!" and "land of the free" and all that.

What I want to know is what you think your freedoms are. What freedoms do you think you have that the rest of the Western democratic world like Canada, Australasia and Europe, don't have. What are they?

For clarity, let's not discuss the right to bear arms, for example. Since that is such a specifically American question based on specific historial elements.
Let's talk about the basic freedoms. Give examples.

It will be most constructive if you can provide comparisions.

Ismael, Byron, et al, I look forward to hearing your views.

Have at you.

 

[weed]

I'll be curious to see also, Cool.

Somehow I think we are not as free as we used to be. I think most people would point to out Constitution when talking about the freedoms that are the rights of American citizens but as well as the Ammendments that further delineate rights there is other legislation and such that can restrict them. I don't think it's avoidable when some rights are abused.

I think of hate crime laws here and our first ammendment.

And I will include gun control, not to debate the issue but to use it as an example.

Some may say that the rights of the individual are disregarded when this happens. I think it's a matter of placing the greater good of the society in front of the individual but it's not deniable that rights become more restricted as this happens.

As this society gets bigger and more complicated some rights will simply become infeasible. Such as the right to a speedy trial.

I think this bogging down is probably due greatly to civil suits as well as mechanisms designed to protect rights (such as when a judgement is appealed). And since the right to suit seems to be another right that has developed along there is direct conflict between the honoring of those rights.

I've been trying to think of more culturally relevant 'freedoms' but everything I think of seems to be addressed by the Constitution in some way.

I don't know how all this compares to the freedoms experienced by Europeans but I believe we do still have more rights than citizens of less fortunate third world countries.

 

[Coolville]

I'll be curious to see also, Cool.

Somehow I think we are not as free as we used to be. I think most people would point to out Constitution when talking about the freedoms that are the rights of American citizens but as well as the Ammendments that further delineate rights there is other legislation and such that can restrict them. I don't think it's avoidable when some rights are abused.

I think of hate crime laws here and our first ammendment.

And I will include gun control, not to debate the issue but to use it as an example.

Some may say that the rights of the individual are disregarded when this happens. I think it's a matter of placing the greater good of the society in front of the individual but it's not deniable that rights become more restricted as this happens.

As this society gets bigger and more complicated some rights will simply become infeasible. Such as the right to a speedy trial.

I think this bogging down is probably due greatly to civil suits as well as mechanisms designed to protect rights (such as when a judgement is appealed). And since the right to suit seems to be another right that has developed along there is direct conflict between the honoring of those rights.

I've been trying to think of more culturally relevant 'freedoms' but everything I think of seems to be addressed by the Constitution in some way.

I don't know how all this compares to the freedoms experienced by Europeans but I believe we do still have more rights than citizens of less fortunate third world countries.

nice start, weed.
Is the right to a speedy trial enshrined somewhere in the Constitution? (or Cuntingstution if were pp-man - )

I've often wondered about censorship. That film rating system you have where someone somewhere decides how old you should be to see a film. Or record labels warning against foul language.
Where does that fit in in freedoms? How do you feel about that?

 

[weed]

From the Constitution

Article [VI.]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.




We also have the right to be free from false imprisonment yet I don't know how our police would ever get their job done if they couldn't detain people for 24 hours before even charging them. Seems like they would need the evidence to charge before holding some one if this were indeed a right.

I'm not complaining.

Though I might complain about the Iraq war resolution passed by our government recently. That over rides the checks and balances outlined in the Constitution that is designed to protect the people.

But it is one more example how our society changes.

 

[Coolville]

Re: From the Constitution

Thanks for the speedy reference.
Not being able to hold someone without charging them is a given. Can a judge be called in to look at the specific situation and determine that the said person should be held for X number of days due to the complicated manner of the charges?
Just asking since that's what happens here. You can't hold someone without charge, but a judge can give the police a limited amount of time to gather the necessary evidence. This only happens if the exisiting evidence signals that this is necessary.

 

[weed]

I think the police have 24 hours to hold someone while they investigate. After that time they have to press charges.

At some point a warrant is issued by a judge.

I'm no lawyer though. This might be different from state to state also.