The Constitution was scribed subsequent to the delegation that occurred at the Constitutional Convention, held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This document was intended to be an improvement of the Articles of Confederation, in which the ending result was an entirely new government called the republic. The idea of institutionalizing a constitution created differences between the participants of the meeting. Those who opposed the idea of a new government and the constitution were called the Antifederalists and those who supported the ratification of the Constitution were federalists, which is the idea of federalism vs. state’s rights. The Constitution failed to protect the rights of the civilians despite Federalists attempts to persuade individuals …show more content…
In the Constitution, there must be a standing army, which is currently known as police officers, to project the image of security and safety within the thirteen colonies. However, this projection comes off highly negative because it depicts the standing army as intimidating and aggressive towards the community. In Document 2, Mercy Otis Warren, an editor and observer in 1787, expresses, ‘it has been said that a standing army is necessary for the dignity and safety of America…but freedom revolts at the idea”. Mercy Warren believed that political officers should not prolong their presence at forefront of the country. When the British were imperialistically hovering over the Americas ten years ago, they felt threatened by their constant presence, hence the Boston Massacre, which were the unintentional fatalities of five colonial individuals by British officers. Comparing this to the Constitutional’s new included law, one cannot ignore nor withstand the similarities in treatment, which should be prevented by America. This can also be associated with the content in Document 1. In this excerpt, Amos Singletary passionately expressed the rhetoric question; “We fought with Great Britain…because they claimed a right to tax us and bind us in all cases…does not this Constitution do the same?” His question is in parallel to the similarities between British treatment and