America's modern left often argues that portions of the US Constitution can be safely ignored because it's old and was written by white dudes. Here's a (fairly calm) piece that explores that argument. (Also look up "constitution living document".)

America's wingnuts often pass around chestnuts of "wisdom" like this and slap each other on the back for how clever they are.

Nevermind the "living Constitution" stuff is what considers your emails to be your "papers" and thus subject to the same protections from government searches.

Still think you're clever? Want to go on being all literalist? Explain how the U.S. Air Force is Constitutional, since Congress "only" has the authority to fund an Army and a Navy under a literal reading of Article I, Section 8.

Who do you think cops brutalize? Local taxpayers. Who do Libertarian Loons whine about when the city is forced to pay out damages? Local taxpayers. What piece of technology would reduce the affects on both?

Libertarians: penny wise, pound stupid.

there would probably be a lot less looting

There was very little looting to begin with. It's the same media amplification that allowed 200 Teabaggers hanging outside a congressional office to get more coverage than 200,000 people protesting the invasion of Iraq.

Where's your evidence that the "private citizen" isn't a retired cop or friend/relative of one? Nah, it's just very very very convenient that this story always pops up about the worrisome costs of cop body cams.

That's not what the federal government is for.

It's what it's for since the passage of the 14th Amendment. You can give the Libertarian Loonery a rest while you google "Bill of Rights" and "equal protection clause".

As a question, why is this a federal problem?

One simple question for another: ever take remedial civics? There's this thing called the Bill of Rights, which state and local authorities have proven themselves incapable of enforcing.

Dumbfuckery. First, where does the Constitution lay out a right to drink alcohol? You no more "need" to show ID to enter a church or to post on Slashdot. Second, voter fraud for all practical purposes simply does not exist. Just about every case that dumbfucks bring up to support ID laws were either cases of someone double voting (in person and absentee), a person with a felony record, or failing to establish residency before voting.

None of which would be prevented by ID.

When Democrats win, they get a misty tear in their eye as they are overcome with pride that the will of the people has prevailed, democracy has been saved, and their party now has a clear mandate.

Let's fix that nonsense: When Democrats win elections, the media says they need to be bipartisan and work with Republicans. When the Democrats lose elections, it's because they're too far to the left.

When Republicans lose elections, it's because they didn't move far enough to the right to make their base happy. When they win elections, it's a sign they have a mandate and the Democrats should be bipartisan and work with them.

Notice the consist theme? Democrats are always supposed to move to the right.

The Major national papers are just a unofficial wing of the Democratic party and wothey sork to suppress embarrassing things like this.

The "biased liberal media" myth died in the 2000 election. First, after the media spent months inventing Gore "exaggerations" only to let Bush take credit in a debate for a patient right's bill he vetoed as governor. The coup de grace was burying the press recount showing Gore winning a statewide recount under any scenario.

After that, anyone spouting the "biased liberal media" canard was obviously wearing clown shoes. After the New York Times held the NSA wiretapping story until after the 2004 elections, they're just a bunch of fucking idiots.

Whilst the Republicans have played this game well in recent years, it's not that long ago that the Democrats were at it equally successfully, and in many states they still do it. Which is not to suggest that it's a good thing - but let's not get partisan about it.

Ah yes, the "Johnny did it first - decades ago - so it's no big deal that Boehner is Speaker right now because of gerrymandering" canard. Not get partisan, my ass.

I love comments like these because they show how wingers have created an alternate reality for themselves where facts need not apply.

I love comments like this. Tell me what is right wing about these positions:

Tell me you've paid an iota of attention to what the Democrats have been doing for the last 30 years?

nationalizing health care

You mean far better care for far less money? Not only did Democrats take Single Payer off the table before negotiations began, top Democrats (Obama, Reid, Baucus, Pelsoi) killed the Public Option. If, on the other hand, you're referring to Obomneycare....yeah, that's a right wing, market based plan. First cooked up by the Heritage Foundation in the 90's - something both Obamabots and wingers have an allergic reaction to remembering.

paid college tuition

Where. Nothing has been done nationally, and tuition will have about doubled under Brown.

open borders/immigration amnesty

Obama deported immigrants at a rate far higher than Bush, before pulling a mini-Reagan when it was politically meaningless.

regulation of business, to a detrimental level

On some planet where Democrats haven't continued deregulating businesses? Reagan-Bush sent 800 bankers to jail over the S&L fraud; Obama hasn't prosecuted a single banker for a crisis 70 times as large. If, again, you're referring to Obomneycare, take it up with these guys.

union empowerment

"Empowered" right out of their teaching jobs with RTTT, which is Bush's NCLB on steroids. Sin taxes on union health insurance, something Obama attacked McCain for wanting to do in '08. Killed EFCA. Auto bailout gutted the union by forcing new employees to work for far less money than existing workers - and why support a union if you aren't going to get anything out of it?

higher taxes on the rich

Most of Bush tax cuts were extended, and they keep wanting to cut corporate tax rates.

more social programs for the poor

They just cut 9 billion in food stamps in the last farm bill. And who do you think "ended welfare as we know it" in the 90's, President Dole?

The property is now valued at the price of the greatly diminished lot value: 18000 dollars

Which is 18000 more than you'd be getting back from paying rent. And that's probably less than the amount you saved on your taxes via mortgage interest deductions.

And the people that supposedly witnessed this had many conflicting stories between each other as well as their own accounts over time.

Which happens with all eyewitness testimony. If you would say the same prosecutor would be reluctant to press the case if it was Brown shooting Officer Wilson, with the same amount of shifting eyewitness testimony, let me know first so I can put my coffee down.

All eyewitness testimony is unreliable. If it was Brown who killed Willson, no prosecutor in the country would have a problem with an eyewitness with shifting details.

especially since Michael Brown had just robbed a convenience store.

Especially batshit irrelevant, as the cop had no idea there was a reported robbery. Prosecutors can 'indict a ham sandwich' with a grand jury. If they didn't indict, it's because the prosecutor didn't want them to. First in the Ohio Wal-Mart murder, and now in Missouri.

The police have a dangerous job - they put their lives on the line every single day (just ask one), and they simply can't take the chance that a black man might be dangerous. No. That's completely wrong,

Indeed, it's wrong. Law enforcement isn't even in the top ten most dangerous jobs - roofers, firemen, truckers are all more likely to end up dead "in the line of duty" than cops. Take out car accidents (which don't have anything to do with them having a justification for itchy trigger fingers) and I don't know if they even make it in the top 20.