Posted on 10/14/2017 6:47:23 AM PDT by dynachrome
Lucas, from Seymour, has been critical of the media’s coverage of his efforts to repeal a state law that requires a permit to carry a handgun.
He has stated reporters, columnists and editorial boards mischaracterize his idea, which is sometimes referred to as “constitutional carry.”
“If I was as irresponsible with my handgun as the media has been with their keyboard, I’d probably be in jail,” Lucas said.
The proposal would require professional journalists to submit an application with Indiana State Police. They would be fingerprinted and would have to pay $75 for a lifetime license.
If journalists have been convicted of a felony, their application may not be approved.
Lucas’ proposal is almost an exact copy of the state’s law requiring a license to carry a handgun, which Lucas has tried to repeal unsuccessfully for several years.
(Excerpt) Read more at fox59.com ...
The lawmaker is a Republican. Republicans — including President Trump — have shown a disturbing hostility toward the 1st Amendment lately.
He is trolling the anti gun people.
This same lawmaker is trying to get constitutional carry passed. This bill to require a “1st Amendment” is intended to illustrate their hypocrisy for requiring a license for the 2nd Amendment.
You have to admit, there are very few cases in which the press is clearly defined and most are dinosaur old. A good solid “progressive attack” on the meaning of press should send shivers down the spine of the entrenched leftards. If they don’t approve of the tactics, stop using them.
This is great!
He is shoving their hypocracy in their face.
Before you get twisted by fake news, the legislator says this is to PROVE A POINT, holding journalists to the same standards that they are demanding gun owners be held to.
And man, are they screaming!
So what’s his point? Is he saying if Democrats won’t support the 2nd Amendment, he’ll gut the 1st Amendment? This gut is an absolute riot! Maybe he should propose to gut the 4th Amendment, too, and monitor the press’s phone calls like Obama did.
This was excellent trolling by a lawmaker. I believe all laws passed should apply to lawmakers anyway. Obamacare for all of congress and their families.
How ignorant and totally triggered your viewpoint is. How does that first amendment opinion affect your life? If the press can say and/or print anything they want without the backing of truth, why does it bother you that the President can say anything he wants based on the whole truth? The concern troll feature you should focus on is if he acts on it in an unconstitutional way, but then again . . .
>>So what’s his point? Is he saying if Democrats won’t support the 2nd Amendment, he’ll gut the 1st Amendment? <<
The point is if you can restrict one Right from the BOR, you can restrict them all.
It is a point well-made.
The reason this falls flat is because Republicans are already demanding journalists be credentialed. The Republican sheriff of Clark County, Nevada would not let independent journalists attend a recent press conference. He would only recognize "credentialed journalists". The Republican Indiana lawmaker is not being absurd when he asks for licensing of journalists. Some of his fellow party members are already doing it.
“Democrats won’t support the 2nd Amendment”
Democrats are little stalinists. Do you think they support the 1st or 2nd amendment? You would be wrong.
Brilliant!!
I hope you’re being sarcastic.
The representative is exposing how the 2nd Amendment is being abused by treating the First Amendment the same way.
Brilliant! Love it!
I disagree. The 1st amendment is about free speech. It’s not about telling lies and putting them forth as truth via means of regulated public transmission. They can stand on a street corner and say Trump wants to increase our nuclear arsenal by 10 times the current size without fear of any police action. Stating it as fact via public airwaves after knowing it is false SHOULD cause additional scrutiny when your broadcast license needs to be renewed.
This dude is pointing out the hypocrisy of the libs regarding their treatment of the first and second amendment.
Hm, has there been some sort of citizen- or independent-journalism going on in LA getting close to exposing corruption or something?
The lawmaker is making a sarcastic point.
The media has proven to be a very dangerous industry.
It gets people are charged up and emotions cocked to act, on everything the media hypes up with its 24/6/365 tragedy agendas, political agendas, public convictions of “guilty” before any trial agendas, agendas where it uses and hypes the severity of a charge being made, regardless of the veracity of any evidence.
The media is a weapon of mass destruction aimed at the populace.
The lawmaker is making a sarcastic point, which is why a position as dangerous as a gun does not have to be licensed like a gun.
The legislation should specify, in lieu of a license, that press freedom is valid only on methods available at the time of the adoption of the 1A. That would be movable type on hand cranked presses - no television or radio or internet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.