Licensing for the 2nd Amendment is bad, but for the 1st?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Not that it matters to many ('cept me and a few others) but I find a president uttering the words below, as extremely troubling. A siting president directly talking about restricting the freedom of the press, openly suggesting that speech can be, and should be, revoked. Absolutely crazy.
    It is frankly disgusting the press is able to write whatever it wants to write
    With all of the Fake News coming out of NBC and the Networks, at what point is it appropriate to challenge their License? Bad for country!
    Network news has become so partisan, distorted and fake that licenses must be challenged and, if appropriate, revoked. Not fair to public!
    -President Donald J. Trump (United States of America?)



    Well some others find it troubling, as well.
    Mr. President: Words spoke by the President of the United States matter. Are you tonight recanting of the oath you took on January 20 to preserve, protect, and defend the First Amendment?
    -Sen. Ben Sass Nebraska (R)




    So, INGO, what says you? Do you find a president saying such things concerning, even dangerous, or are some attacks on rights more acceptable to others? Should, at President Donald J. Trump's suggestion, we take a look at the licensing of our (free?) press?
    Here's what some other thought about the issue:
    The liberty of the press is essential to the security of freedom in a state: it ought not, therefore, to be restrained in this commonwealth.
    -John Adams
    Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.
    -Thomas Jefferson
    Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing, and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press. It has accordingly been decided by the practice of the States, that it is better to leave a few of its noxious branches to their luxuriant growth, than, by pruning them away, to injure the vigour of those yielding the proper fruits.
    -JamesMadison




    Bonus quote: Do these words seem familiar?
    All over the world, wherever there are capitalists, freedom of the press means freedom to buy up newspapers, to buy writers, to bribe, buy and fake “public opinion” for the benefit of the bourgeoisie.
    -Vladimir Lenin

    Kut (asks, when does this become a problem?... it's a problem if someone even whispers something about restricting the Second Amendment, but this?)

    Disclaimer: I'm not going to start threads based on every bad action by the president, but this subject definitely deserved it's own thread, as it's an explicit attack on an institution that is a cornerstone to our democracy.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,886
    149
    Columbus, OH
    [Virtual teal] Trump is talking about a television network, which is already licensed by the FCC in order to broadcast. I believe one of the criteria to obtain/maintain that license is to serve the public interest, and to be found in violation can rezult in fines or broadcast license revocation. I think he is on solid ground as I believe he is de facto head of the FCC, so he's not covering any new ground since at least the profanity actions by the FCC in the last 10yrs.

    By using the formulation that speaking in whispers about restricting the second amendment is verboten, you are minimizing what is a full-throated cry from Clinton and her ilk in favor of confiscation (the love affair with Australian style gun control). I would like to grant your second post request, but you would need to present the two subjects in a much less agenda-driven manner

    Do I think leaning on NBC about standards and licensing is an attempt to muzzle the free press, No. No presses are involved and no one is suggesting licensing print journalism. Do you really think if NBC was brought to heel there would be no other Trump critics left? This is not existential no matter how much hyperventilating goes on. The licensing standards date from probably the 50s, its not something Trump wants to initiate, its a tool he is signaling he might be willing to use

    On the other hand, the types of new restrictions advocated by the likes of Pelosi and Clinton on the second amendment are much more dangerous to freedom, IMO

    What you choose to minimize and what you choose to overamplify causes me to question the motive/agenda of the poster. Fake Ingo News (hereafter to be abbreviated FIN)
    [end virtual teal]
     

    ghuns

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    9,308
    113
    I think he is on solid ground as I believe he is de facto head of the FCC...

    He may very well be, legally.

    But for a sitting president to use, or talk about using, his power to silence any organization because they are critical of him is NEVER a good thing. It is a slippery slope in the same way that incremental gun control measures are. If we shouldn't give an inch where our 2A rights are concerned, we shouldn't be willing to do so for the 1A.

    Do I think leaning on NBC about standards and licensing is an attempt to muzzle the free press, No. No presses are involved...

    That's like saying our freedom of speech only applies to actual "speech".:rolleyes:
     

    indiucky

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Oh yes, almost forgot. If you can... comment on the subject, not the poster.

    This is a true classic from the 1970's...I kept mine right above my bed and would reach up and tousle her curls periodically....Unlike Johnny Buzzkill here any of you can feel free to comment on the poster.....

    AAEAAQAAAAAAAAieAAAAJDQ4ZTcwYjA3LTZkMzMtNDllYi05MGFmLTVkNTllNjNjZjM2NQ.jpg
     

    ghuns

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Nov 22, 2011
    9,308
    113
    This is a true classic from the 1970's...I kept mine right above my bed and would reach up and tousle her curls periodically....Unlike Johnny Buzzkill here any of you can feel free to comment on the poster.....

    I approve of the subject and the poster.:yesway:
     

    indiucky

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Here is another classic poster from the same era...Notice the angelic like poses with just a hint of naughtiness in the smiles...The photographer knew he was going for the teenage boy's and it's no surprise that this image was the pose on the pinball machine we played the most....

    22903__27871.1436692345.500.500.jpg
     

    eldirector

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 29, 2009
    14,677
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/complaints-about-broadcast-journalism
    What can the FCC do?

    The FCC cannot interfere with a broadcaster's selection and presentation of material for the news and/or its commentary. However, the FCC does regulate content in some narrow areas. Federal law prohibits or limits the broadcast of obscene, indecent or profane language as defined by U.S. courts. Also, the FCC may issue penalties for knowingly broadcasting false information.
    What responsibilities do broadcasters have?

    As public trustees, broadcasters may not intentionally distort the news. The FCC has stated publicly that "rigging or slanting the news is a most heinous act against the public interest." The FCC may act to protect the public interest when it has received documented evidence, such as testimony from persons who have direct personal knowledge of an intentional falsification of the news. Without such documented evidence, the FCC generally cannot intervene.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    So we don't view the 1st Amendment in the say way we the 2nd? How is the FCC different from that of the BATFE? Reasonable restrictions on speech, I guess.
     

    HoughMade

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Oct 24, 2012
    35,612
    149
    Valparaiso
    There is no license to exercise the 1st Amendment. A broadcast license is a license to use a certain portion of the airwaves which, for some reason, it was decided long ago and accepted by both ends of the (official) political spectrum should be controlled by the government. At one time, broadcast licenses may have directly implicated the ability to reach an audience (which is not necessarily a 1st Am. issue), but in 2017? Not really.

    That being said- it was a dumb thing for the President to say and a stupid attitude to have.
     

    Indy-Mike

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 100%
    9   0   0
    Jul 5, 2013
    711
    18
    Carmel
    The FCC does not regulate broadcast networks such as NBC, CBS, etc only individual stations

    From the FCC web site......FCC Regulation of BroadcastRadio and Television. ... We donot license TV or radio networks(such as CBS, NBC, ABC or Fox) or other organizations with which stations have relationships (such as PBS or NPR), except to the extent that those entities may also be station licensees.
     

    Liberty1916

    Shooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 13, 2017
    269
    18
    Home
    I think we should turn the argument back on the MSM and ask why there shouldn't be "reasonable restrictions" or "common sense regulations" on 1A. For instance, how about the FCC fine stations that mention mass shooters names?

    Then sit back and let the MSM argue how 1A is absolute and can't be regulated.
     

    T.Lex

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Mar 30, 2011
    25,859
    113
    FCC licenses are already more like drivers' licences. More of a privilege than a right.

    But yeah, sure, it is further evidence that he doesn't really understand the job he has.
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    Great thread, Kut! I have thought for quite some time that the FCC is useless, and far oversteps their boundaries. The free market regulates language and sexuality on cable without their interference. They really should only be involved in managing bands and frequencies. And the free market could probably do that by itself as well. Get government out of communication.

    As for Trump: on this subject, he can get ****ed. Preferably by the horse he rode in on.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Great thread, Kut! I have thought for quite some time that the FCC is useless, and far oversteps their boundaries. The free market regulates language and sexuality on cable without their interference. They really should only be involved in managing bands and frequencies. And the free market could probably do that by itself as well. Get government out of communication.

    As for Trump: on this subject, he can get ****ed. Preferably by the horse he rode in on.

    Exactly.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,517
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Here is another classic poster from the same era...Notice the angelic like poses with just a hint of naughtiness in the smiles...The photographer knew he was going for the teenage boy's and it's no surprise that this image was the pose on the pinball machine we played the most....

    22903__27871.1436692345.500.500.jpg

    Always been a fan of Kate Jackson. :drool:
     

    MCgrease08

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    37   0   0
    Mar 14, 2013
    14,373
    149
    Earth
    I think we should turn the argument back on the MSM and ask why there shouldn't be "reasonable restrictions" or "common sense regulations" on 1A. For instance, how about the FCC fine stations that mention mass shooters names?

    Then sit back and let the MSM argue how 1A is absolute and can't be regulated.

    Jim Lucas is already on it.


    Indiana lawmaker: Why not license journalists?
    https://www.indystar.com/story/news...as-drafted-bill-license-journalist/757157001/
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,886
    149
    Columbus, OH
    No, no; this is just the next step in Adolph Trumpolini's sinister master plan to ... I don't know - do something bad and ruin freedom and stuff

    #SistAgain
     

    Woobie

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Dec 19, 2014
    7,197
    63
    Losantville
    No, no; this is just the next step in Adolph Trumpolini's sinister master plan to ... I don't know - do something bad and ruin freedom and stuff

    #SistAgain

    This is a recurring theme with him. I think he really would violate 1A any chance he got. I suspect if it weren't for alienating his base, we would find out he is that near and dear with any of the BoR.
     
    Top Bottom