Freedom of the Press???

TimeWatch Editorial
November 03, 2015

Within the last few years, the idea of second amendment rights has again risen to the surface. The argument has become even more intense, given the recent rise in mass shootings. There is an almost insoluble extremity of disagreement on both sides, each presenting what they would insist are valid and irrefutable reasons why they are right.

Those who argue that the tiniest adjustment to current law would be a violation of the rights afforded by the second amendment, insist that the reason for that amendment is to provide citizens the right to defend themselves, and especially to protect themselves from the very institution that seeks to “take away their guns.”

It is not at all difficult to find support for this position among the founders of the nation. George Mason, co-author of the Second Amendment is quoted as saying the following:

“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” – Speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention, June 14, 1778”

Thomas Jefferson, in his Commonplace Book (quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria), had this to say:

"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

On the other hand, those who reject the idea of a multiplicity of weaponry among the population will argue that this restricts the very freedom that gun enthusiasts claim to protect. John Adams, a remarkable political philosopher, who served as the second President of the United States (1797-1801), after serving as the first Vice President under President George Washington was a learned and thoughtful man, who some say was more remarkable as a political philosopher than as a politician, had this to say.

“To suppose arms in the hands of citizens may be used at individual discretion in private self defense, or by partial orders of towns, counties, or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is dissolution of the government.” – A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America,

Notice here that Adams was mindful of the proper use of arms (i.e., legitimate self-defense and militia duty) but was equally concerned about misuse for mob action or anarchy. This is explained in David T. Hardy’s “Second Amendment and the Historiography of the Bill of Rights, 1987”

The continuing debate regarding guns or no guns is therefore legitimate. However, in the same Constitution, there is clear instruction regarding a “Free Press.” A watchman, if you will, a questioner, who insists on interrogation with the most inopportune and uncomfortable examination. This is the FIRST amendment, which of course precedes the SECOND amendment. Quoting it brings so much joy, since included here is the concept of Freedom of Religion, the Right to Assemble etc. all of which are used when convenient to those who are really seeking to accomplish the opposite. Here then is the First Amendment:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

So often in the past, we have boastfully compared ourselves with other nations, other regimes who suppress the Press. I do believe that we have every right to do so, since we do agree that the FIRST amendment is as valid a Right as The Second.

I therefore seriously hope that the next Republican Political debate will reflect the Constitutional Intent of the Founding Fathers and not be the first public revelation of the Strangulation of the Press.

Cameron A. Bowen