Lets talk about the First and Second Amendments.<\/p>\n
Not those two the original ones.<\/p>\n
The original First Amendment created a formula to determine the size of the House of Representatives based on the population of the United States in 1789.<\/p>\n
It didnt pass.<\/p>\n
The original Second Amendment set out to define when Congress can change its pay.<\/p>\n
That didnt pass either.<\/p>\n
What we know today as the First Amendment prohibits the government from depriving us of certain freedoms religion, speech, the press, peaceful assembly, and it allows a path to redress grievances with the government.<\/p>\n
It begins Congress shall make no law<\/p>\n
Pretty clear.<\/p>\n
In his distinguished 34-year career on the Supreme Court, Associate Justice Hugo Black said as much.<\/p>\n
He was the driving force behind the 1964 Times v. Sullivan decision that declared freedom of speech protections in the First Amendment restrict public officials from suing for defamation.<\/p>\n
Black also sat solidly behind the press in the 1971 Pentagon Papers case in which The New York Times published damaging evidence about the government's involvement in Vietnam.<\/p>\n
Black wrote: Only a free and unrestrained press can effectively expose deception in government.<\/p>\n
In an opinion piece, managing editor Pat Fox writes that we should choose our champions for truth-telling carefully.<\/p>\n
Ive made my living, raised a family, paid my mortgage thanks to the First Amendment. I get edgy whenever someone tries to mess with it. I dont like it.<\/p>\n
And yet<\/p>\n
People have messed with it a lot.<\/p>\n
There are libel laws sometimes used to intimidate reporters from pursuing stories. Libel laws ostensibly restrict the press from unjustly defaming individuals and organizations.<\/p>\n
Also, newspapers cannot copy information verbatim or run a photo from a published work without facing a suit over copywrite infringement.<\/p>\n
What gives?<\/p>\n
The Constitution says Congress shall make no laws<\/p>\n
Well, Im willing to discuss it. Pretty much everyone in the newspaper business loves discussing it.<\/p>\n
The press is the only profession, by the way, specifically cited for protection in the Constitution.<\/p>\n
One of the best expressions of that distinction came from Justice Potter Stewart in his dissent opinion in a 1971 case involving police searches of newsrooms.<\/p>\n
Perhaps as a matter of abstract policy a newspaper office should receive no more protection from unannounced police searches than, say, the office of a doctor or the office of a bank. But we are here to uphold a Constitution. And our Constitution does not explicitly protect the practice of medicine or the business of banking from all abridgement by government. It does explicitly protect the freedom of the press.<\/p>\n
I love that.<\/p>\n
On the other hand, should I be able to pick out of the air some local businessman and publish an article saying he is a shady no-goodnik who parks in handicapped stalls?<\/p>\n
Im willing to discuss that or any other matter relating to the First Amendment and the press. Lets hold a town hall.<\/p>\n
Now, concerning the Second Amendment<\/p>\n
I dont like anyone messing around with the Constitution not the First, Second, Third or any other amendments.<\/p>\n
I grew up in the rural Midwest and spent a lot of my youth hunting, so Im familiar with guns. Many of my friends own one. We want to keep them, too, for a variety of reasons.<\/p>\n
We all came by our firearms legally, and we all took safety courses on their proper use.<\/p>\n
By golly, wed probably be willing to talk to other people about our guns, maybe discuss safety and care, whether wed ever loan one to a high school senior or whether wed give one to a certified manic depressive.<\/p>\n
There are some people who wont talk about these sorts of things, though. Sixty of them are in the U.S. Senate. There are a lot more in the Georgia Legislature.<\/p>\n
They wont discuss it.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Read the original: Lets talk about the First and Second Amendments. Not those two the original ones. Continue reading
\nOpinion: Free speech and guns a winning combination - Appen Media<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"