Bloomberg: Interpretation of Constitution must change
He's got a good head start already in changing the interpretaton of the Constitution, what with telling New Yorkers what and how much they can eat or drink and reserving the Second Amendment right to bear arms for his bodyguards while denying ordinary citizens the same right.
But this is even dumber - and more dangerous.
In the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings, Mayor Michael Bloomberg said Monday the country's interpretation of the Constitution will "have to change" to allow for greater security to stave off future attacks.
"The people who are worried about privacy have a legitimate worry," Mr. Bloomberg said during a press conference in Midtown. "But we live in a complex word where you're going to have to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days, if you will. And our laws and our interpretation of the Constitution, I think, have to change."
Mr. Bloomberg, who has come under fire for the N.Y.P.D.'s monitoring of Muslim communities and other aggressive tactics, said the rest of the country needs to learn from the attacks.
"Look, we live in a very dangerous world. We know there are people who want to take away our freedoms. New Yorkers probably know that as much if not more than anybody else after the terrible tragedy of 9/11," he said.
"We have to understand that in the world going forward, we're going to have more cameras and that kind of stuff. That's good in some sense, but it's different from what we are used to," he said.
The mayor pointed to the gun debate and noted the courts have allowed for increasingly stringent regulations in response to ever-more powerful weapons.
"Clearly the Supreme Court has recognized that you have to have different interpretations of the Second Amendment and what it applies to and reasonable gun laws ... Here we're going to to have to live with reasonable levels of security," he said, pointing to the use of magnetometers to catch weapons in city schools.
The irony is none of the security measures he mentions would have stopped the Boston bombers. They made it easier to catch them, but unless you invent a device that can peer into the minds of men and glean their intent, we'll never stop most of these incidents from occurring.
Meanwhile, the state becomes more obtrusive, more aggressive in violating our privacy and we lose liberty because of it. Nanny Bloomberg is just the guy who would take survelliance tools meant to stop attacks and spy on citizens to make sure they're not drinking super sized sodas. People like Bloomberg should never be handed the levers of power simply because they think they are better than everyone else and believe they know what's best for you.
Let's keep interpreting the Constitution pretty much the same way we are doing today.