>The US Constitution is a spiritual descendent of the
>Magna Carta. It is the bedrock 'agreement' against
>which all other laws must be measured for legitimacy.
>So in a certain sense, Catherine, yes, being in or
>conformant to the Constitution --and especially the
>Bill Of Rights, which specifies the limits of State
>power over individuals-- is more or less the defining
>characteristic of 'good, ethical, virtuous,...' law in
>the US.
that is is a foundation of US law wasn't what i was questioning, but rather whether an argument over whether or not gun control is desirable is answered by direct reference to the consitution
>Countries without a firm Constitution have absolutely
>no defence against anything the lawmaking body likes to
>do. In such countries, any law is ipso facto 'good',
>no matter how biased or hopeless on its face. In the
>US, grossly unfair laws generally get struck down by
>the Supreme Court as violating one of the
>Constitutional guarantees.
really? it never struck me as even nearly that utopic
Catherine