Michael S. Lorrey [email@example.com] wrote:
>The one weakness I feel the US Constitution has is that it lacks an
>explicit glossary. There should be
>a glossary of simple definitions that are hard to misunderstand.
I don't see why anyone would need a glossary to understand the Constitution; it seems to have been written in simple terms that anyone could understand, so that any jury could easily tell whether a law was unconstitutional and acquit if it was. The problem is not the wording, it's that generations of lawyers have convinced people that it's a much more complicated document than it really is, and that phrases like 'shall not be infringed' don't really, actually mean that.