Are the amendments listed in the order of importance?

HollowHead · 01-09-2013, 14:34

Interesting discussion on another gun board: Are the First, Second, Third, etc. first, second and third on purpose or is it just arbitrary? HH

al_r · 01-09-2013, 14:46

Ordered in number of proposal; 1st 10 were on the same day in 1791?

fnfalman · 01-09-2013, 15:16

To me it does seem to be listed in order of importance:

1. The right to hold an opinion, to express an idea, to hold a belief - freedom of mind and thought has to come first.
2. The ability to defend your freedom.
3. No government intrusion or requisition of your personal property.
4. No illegal search and seizure which may stem from intrusion or requisitioning your personal properties.

After this the rest of the amendments talk about personnel protection of and from the laws.

To me it's not arbitrary at all.

HollowHead · 01-09-2013, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by fnfalman

To me it does seem to be listed in order of importance:

1. The right to hold an opinion, to express an idea, to hold a belief - freedom of mind and thought has to come first.
2. The ability to defend your freedom.
3. No government intrusion or requisition of your personal property.
4. No illegal search and seizure which may stem from intrusion or requisitioning your personal properties.

After this the rest of the amendments talk about personnel protection of and from the laws.

To me it's not arbitrary at all.

I tend to agree with you. The right to free thought and expression is paramount and the others are close, close seconds. HH

cowboy1964 · 01-09-2013, 15:26

Some say the 2nd Amendment protects all the others so shouldn't it be first? But it's irrelevant, really. The Bill of Rights is all or nothing. You can't carve out the ones you don't like.

John Galt · 01-09-2013, 15:26

Actually, the 2nd proposed amendment (concerning congressional pay raises) was only ratified ~20 yrs ago making it the 27th amendment. The RKBA was actually proposed as the 4th.

fnfalman · 01-09-2013, 15:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Galt

Actually, the 2nd proposed amendment (concerning congressional pay raises) was only ratified ~20 yrs ago making it the 27th amendment. The RKBA was actually proposed as the 4th.

If that's truly is the case then obviously there's an order of precedence to the Ten Amendments.

cgwahl · 01-09-2013, 15:47

I do not believe they are, but I know a lot of people view it as such.

Desert Duck · 01-09-2013, 22:57

Hadn't thought about this. Interesting question to ponder.

I think they might be weighted accordingly.

cesaros · 01-09-2013, 22:59

They are all equally important, and all equally inalienable.

But historically, thats the order they were written down..that why they're in that order

***Peace Warrior*** · 01-09-2013, 23:02

At least the first one should be first.

Without good morals, and without the freedom to express these good morals, the entire Constitution and Bill of Rights are merely wasted ink and paper.

DoubleWide · 01-10-2013, 00:04

You have to realize that one most of it is based on previous documents like the Bill of Rights 1689 and stripped down from probably 20 amendments which were actually part of a number of articles.

Did some think 1-10 was the correct order? Probably, but some also probably disagreed.

IMO, Freedom of speech is probably more important since without it, violence would come first. You really don't want to have either of them without the other though.

Bren · 01-10-2013, 04:23

So that would make the third amendment more important than the 4th, 5th, 6th, or 10th?

Even in historical context, so much for that theory.

HollowHead · 01-10-2013, 09:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren

So that would make the third amendment more important than the 4th, 5th, 6th, or 10th?

In in historical context, so much for that theory.

The soldiers can stay at your place then.

HH

gilfo · 01-10-2013, 09:25

To me they are in the CORRECT order as far as what I want my rights to be.

Bren · 01-10-2013, 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by gilfo

To me they are in the CORRECT order as far as what I want my rights to be.

So you're more concerned about soldiers being quartered in your home than about the government searching it, seizing your property and sending you to prison without a trial?

fnfalman · 01-10-2013, 09:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bren

So you're more concerned about soldiers being quartered in your home than about the government searching it, seizing your property and sending you to prison without a trial?

Soldiers quartering in home is the first move of intrusion and conquest of private properties.