Thank you for reading the MtDemocrat.com digital edition. In order to continue reading this story please choose one of the following options.
If you are a current subscriber and wish to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com, please select the Subscriber Verification option below. If you already have a login, please select "Login" at the lower right corner of this box.
Special Introductory Offer
For a short time we will be offering a discount to those who call us in order to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your print subscription. Our customer support team will be standing by Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm to assist you.
If you are not a current subscriber and wish not to take advantage of our special introductory offer, please select the $12 monthly option below to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your online subscription
I just can’t understand how the mainstream media can embrace gun control, which is an attack on the Second Amendment. Don’t they understand that the First Amendment will be next?
There has already been a attack on talk radio’s First Amendment rights because they don’t follow the party line of the ruling class.
If they can go after guns with an executive order why not crush or at least limit your First Amendment right using the same tactics?
If our Founding Fathers could not envision an “assault rifle” when they wrote the Second Amendment then I am sure they couldn’t envision TV, radio or the Internet when they wrote the First Amendment. Using the same logic it could be said the First Amendment only covers written and spoken words until they are electronically enhanced. So any books (word processors and copy machines are electronic), TV, radio or Internet would be subjected to government oversight and taxation. The first amendment would only cover the handwritten word (pencil and paper) or spoken words before they are amplified or recorded. In all fairness, a manual type writer should be allowed.
There could be a 10-day cooling off period for violent or provocative stories or just ban them all together.
Writers and journalists should all have background checks and a record free from felonies or violent misdemeanors.
If they have ever been shown to have purposely spread disinformation or lied using electronically enhanced media they are guilty of a felony.
Dianne Feinstein would issue a list of the 2,271 words you could use (“that should be enough for the people of the U.S.”) and to use any not on that list would be a felony.
No stories over 4,000 words and a special add-on license and fee for books and movies. Journalists would need written permission to air or publish stories with questionable content and the government will determine what is questionable.
All stories would have to have a serial number so things like sources can be verified; yes you will have to give up sources. They will also want to know who wrote it, who published or directed it, etc. Failure to have a serial number or removing it would be a felony.
If someone copies a violent act or crime seen or read they could trace it back to author and those responsible using serial numbers and hold them financially and civilly liable.
Can’t forget taxation: maybe 1/10 of a cent on words over three letters and more for words over 10 letters.
Does any of this seem beyond what some of the elite in D.C. would be willing to propose? And once it is proposed (like Nancy Pelosi says) you need to pass it to figure out what is in it.
By the way, all local, state and federal employees would be exempt from this.