Does the U.S. constitution have provisions to keep the U.S.A. from falling into a dictatorship ?

Question

These are some of the steps that Hitler used to turn a democracy into a dictatorial power.

(x) 1. He rigged the election.

(x) 2. He used an alleged attack.

(x) 3. He controlled the media.

(x) 4. He made his own laws.

(x) 5. He turned people against each other.

... 6. He took over local governments and the police.

source:
http://www.johndclare.net/Nazi_Germany1.htm

"Bobby D" You said it, not me.

"Ibnetti" I will do that. Thanks !

"Kat" I will look over the 1st 10 amendments. Thanks !

"sway_ii" Are you feeling picked on?

"Hammy" Let's hope each branch does its job !

"Hammy" Don't take my question as a Party issue. Take it more as a Government / Business Vs. The People.

"Pandak" Scary indeed !

"Ed S" WOW !

"szydkids" Looks like I won't have to look up the 2nd amendment.

"amish_renegade" It sounds like we should be concerned about who we elect for office.

"rimrocka" That sounds like a good provision.

"sway_ii" I only drink clear water. I would not be so apprehensive of this administration, but time after time they have shown us they can not be trusted. Just look at these pictures, and then tell me what you see.
http://911blimp.net/vid_fakeOsamaVideo.shtml

Answer 1

It's called the bill of rights and it's supposed to. But the bill of rights only works when people are educated in and participate in politics. Otherwise morons vote for the person that looks good on TV. The problem with electing people that make decisions for you is that they do just that. They make decisions for us. We give up some of our say in politics just so we don't have to deal with the political system. Like you stated above Hitler used a democracy to gain power, that is the one true flaw of a democracy. A democracy kills itself.

Second thing is Right to bear arms. Armed people don't sit idly and allow there rights to be taken. Surprisingly guns make excellent persuasion tools.

Answer 2

The President of the United States has certain privileges enabled when he submits a declaration of "national emergency" to Congress and it is passed. These "national emergencies" do have certain limitations though.

TITLE 50 CHAPTER 34 SUBCHAPTER II § 1622 sets a limitation on the length of time "national emergencies" may be in effect. All "national emergencies" are reviewed every 6 months to determine if said "national emergency" should remain in effect. Also, they can be ended at any time by either the President or Congress.

   http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode50/usc_sec_50_00001622----000-.html

You can find a list of "national emergencies" enacted since 1979 on pages 16-19 of this document.

   http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/6216.pdf

In and of itself, there really isn't a problem with the concept of "emergency powers". It's an understood necessity during times of crisis which I acknowledge even though I am opposed the policies and ideology of the Bush Administration.

It's the Patriot ACT which seems to irk most people. It made many amendments to the US Code that dictates the powers that can be granted to the President when a declaration of "national emergency" is passed. It's rather lengthy and would take way too much time to analyze all the powers it granted the President. You can read the current version of the Patriot Act here and look up the amendments it made at the Cornell website.

Patriot Act
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=107_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ056.107

US Code at Cornell Law
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/titles.html

This is the particular Act that the President has taken much leeway with his "emergency powers". Hopefully, if we get a Democratic Congress we'll be able to fix some of these problems.

Here's a tip for finding the amendments made in the Patriot ACT. "50 U.S.C. 1702" refers to Title 50 § Section 1702. Just go to the pertinent section and do a search for "1702". All the listings for amendments follow this format and can be searched likewise.

Answer 3

3 branches of government.

To be effective, all laws must have a discipline, while never allowing a law to become an opinion.

The sword is separated from the purse! The law has no power, but to interpret the constitution. It has no sword and no purse.

Hitler lived in a different system.

As for Bush:

(x) 1. He rigged the election -1996 both parties received word of the voting issues in Florida. Neither party cared or took action. One party suddenly cared in 2000.

(x) 2. He used an alleged attack. - Congress actually approved actions in Afghan and Iraq. This wasn't done in Vietnam or Korea - refresh my memory on the party in charge.

(x) 3. He controlled the media - If he does, he must not be paying them much.

(x) 4. He made his own laws - not sure about this one, but domestic spying is a no no.

(x) 5. He turned people against each other - I think one party forgot about team work. Without it, problems don't get solved.

Answer 4

Jeez, George Bush has done all the things you said Hitler did. Now, that's scary...

Anyway, yes and no. Yes, the founders thought that by having different branches of goivernment you could prevent dictatorship. But they couldn't forsee a time (like today) when the administration doesn't give a whit about the Constitution, the Congress is a bunch of wimps, and the entire government is controlled by one party.

Answer 5

Well in australia (our constitutions are very similiar), we have what is called an "implied provision". Dictatorships were banned since the magna carta and it is an implied common law right to be ruled by the people, not by a person. that is, the supreme court will never allow any laws which threaten the representative nature of government.

Answer 6

Yes, the U.S. constitution does have such a provision. That would be the second amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

I think that means if a dictator takes power, we blow his head off. At least that's how I interpret it.

Answer 7

There should be provisions to stop dictatorship. Dubya has already been changing Constitution, whenever it can benefit his agenda. The things that Hitler did to gain power, has also been done by the current administration. I wish everyone would wake up to these facts, before it's too late.

Answer 8

We have many checks and balances in this country one of them being the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

There are writings of our founding fathers that point out the the citizen must be armed to fight tyranny. The Federalist Papers speak of the right to bear arms as a individual right as well a papers of Jefferson and others.


Article II US Bill of Rights
A well regulated militia being necessary for a FREE STATE, (comma) the RIGHT of the PEOPLE to keep and bear, (comma) arms shall not be infringed.

Answer 9

Yes... it's called the First 10 Amendments of the US Constitution. They were put there by our forefather's to prevent the United States to turn into another England.

Answer 10

YES! It's called the 2nd Amendment..which was originally put in place to protect ourselves from our own government! Look it up!