It’s already happening, in case you’ve missed it. In fact, liberals have successfully been able to re-write the Second Amendment, and the 14th Amendment to fit their narratives, even though neither clearly states their purpose. And, it’s already happening with the First Amendment…right under your eyes. So, why should the liberals in this country be the only ones allowed to do it? Let me first explain what’s been happening.
The Second Amendment states, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Now, if you were just going to read that, you would understand that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”, actually has. If you are one that believes that words mean things, then you have to go along with the fact that there is nothing that should stand in the way of any citizen of owning a firearm. It doesn’t say “no bump stocks”; it doesn’t say “no assault weapons”. It says “shall not be infringed”. That would also mean that you cannot stop anyone for any reason from purchasing a firearm. That would suggest you can’t do background checks, wouldn’t it?
Let’s look at the 14th Amendment. Now, liberals used this some 47 years ago to legalize abortion through Roe v Wade. The portion of the 14th Amendment that was used is, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” Those that argued this said that women who wanted an abortion were being denied “privacy” and so, they weren’t being treated equally under the law. That was the whole argument. It was certainly a stretch, and legal scholars on both sides have questioned whether or not the Supreme Court (which was liberal) was legislating from the bench.
Now, let’s look at the First Amendment. In today’s environment, you have Freedom of the Press. There’s a reason for that. The press is supposed to be protected in the event that they have to investigate and report on ill-happenings dealing with the government. One supreme example that comes to mind of this being used correctly was the Washington Post’s investigation and publishing stories involving Watergate, which ultimately forced the resignation of Richard Nixon. However, in the last few years, it appears that several members of the press are abusing this Amendment. Instead of investigating stories against the government, as Woodward & Bernstein did, they are making up what’s been known as “fake news”. The New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC, The Washington Post, and others have been guilty, and have admitted to faking news. They have published and aired stories that were totally false, and were designed only to make the administration look bad, while lying about the facts that were given. Reporters were fired when this was brought out on some occasions, but not all.
I for one, would suggest that if the Trump administration, or any administration in the future had to deal with this type of false reporting, when it’s found to have been done with malice, it requires the administration to deny the offending organization protection under the law. It’s one thing to miss a fact or get something wrong. It’s another when you knowingly violate journalistic integrity to publish or air a story that has been made up with the intent of misleading the public. That would be akin to yelling, “Fire” in a crowded theater. That is not covered by Freedom of Speech, and frankly fake news shouldn’t be covered by Freedom of the Press. If a news organization is going to air false information, and knowingly do so, they should lose that protection, and be denied further protections under the First Amendment.
Obviously, before it’s being done, it’s going to have to be brought before the courts to decide, but if found guilty, the objective organization should be banned from falling under the First Amendment going forward. THAT will stop fake news on both sides from occurring!
Carry on world…you’re dismissed…and stay safe!