Us And UK Constitution Compared

8 Pages 1963 Words

€™s who know their constituents are against such changes. No government in their right mind would attempt to change the constitution without wide spread support. In the event of such constitution change all political parties are normally consulted so to enable the government of the time to take the credit for the changes without the threat of being held responsible, as at the time it was a general consensus that brought about such changes. In addition to consultation government (more) commonly (in recent times) holds referendums to ensure national support for any changes.
The real fear with the UK constitution is that in extreme governments could pass/change constitutional laws through force that jeopardising the whole political system in England, however the probability of this happening is very marginal. There isn’t this threat in the US but their constitution is unable to evolve and change fairly easily when circumstances demand it, unless a vast majority supports the change. An example with this is the right to carry arms, which is entrenched in the US constitution. Yet it is causing a considerable amount of anguish at the moment, many people support the banning of guns however there is not the substantial majority backing that is needed to amend the constitution.
Both constitutions need consent in some form or another to be changed but I feel that the luxury of evolution outweighs the minimal risk of abuse. Another issue is that the Individual rights of people cannot be guaranteed by the UK Constitution as they can in the US never the less the US cannot easily improve one’s rights as t...