We Americans enjoy many freedoms that citizens of many other countries do not. America is “the Land of the Free”, as the saying goes.
It is nice to have freedom, for sure. However, with freedom comes responsibility.
The Constitution of the United States, specifically the Bill of Rights, enumerates some of the freedoms that we enjoy. The 1st and 2nd Amendments lay out, in sparse detail, those some key freedoms that we cherish.
The Founding Fathers knew what they were talking about at that point in the Nation’s history, and they had no way of knowing that their new republic would change in a million ways over the coming centuries. Had they possessed a crystal ball, they might have crafted those Bill of Rights (and the entire Constitution) differently.
Anticipating a changing Nation and the application of laws, the Constitution included a Judicial Branch of government to interpret our rights as America morphed beyond the initial thirteen colonies and as society and the economy changed.
The First Amendment guarantees Americans freedom of speech, the press, assembly and the right to petition the Government for redress of grievances. Basically, those were the freedoms that our Nation’s settlers didn’t enjoy under British rule, resulting in dissatisfaction and, eventually, causing the Revolutionary War.
Those are our most cherished rights, the ones that changed us from Kings’ subjects into participants in a democracy.
The freedom of speech allows us to say what’s on our mind, in private and in public, about society and government. “Free Speech” is not absolute, however, as the Supreme Court has determined that, for example, one cannot yell, “Fire!”, in a crowded theatre when there is no danger present, causing a stampede that might injure innocent people. The Supreme Court has also determined that inciting a riot or lynch mob is not a reasonable exercise of free speech, because innocent people can be harmed.
The Court has also ruled that individuals possess a right not to be subjected to falsehoods that impugn their character via slanderous (oral) or libelous (written) statements.
The Court’s guiding principle, over the centuries, was that “free speech” which harms innocent citizens is not, or may not, be protected by the 1st Amendment. You may say nasty things about my wife in private, but if you insult her publicly, in front of me, juries have found that I have the right to beat your ass. In fact, one of the Founding Fathers, Alexander Hamilton, was shot to death in a duel by Aaron Burr over perceived libelous comments… and was not prosecuted.
Of course, the Founding Fathers never anticipated anything like the Information Age, where facts and falsehoods are virtually indistinguishable, information and misinformation can be disseminated instantaneously all over the world in a few seconds, and the originator of such information can remain unknown or, worse, portrayed as someone who had nothing to do with the statement (i.e. a “false flag” dirty trick).
We live in a country right now where we are flooded by devious and hurtful “free speech” which is destroying our society. Social media and broadcast media are being used to confuse people, inflame tense situations, incite angry mobs, and gain notoriety for psychopathic individuals.
This is our precious “free speech” at work, and government and society seem to be powerless to regain control of civility in America.
Just the other day, a deranged 18-year-old fellow, influenced by hateful conspiracy theory rubbish on social and broadcast media, gunned down 13 citizens in Buffalo, New York. He live-stream broadcasted his proud accomplishment on Twitch (a social media platform) and it was later determined that he had planned this attack on predominantly African American grocery shoppers well in advance, having prepared a 180-page manifesto for public consumption that rationalized his defense of “White” America.
Unfortunately, this massacre was only the latest such hate crime perpetrated in the United States: there have been many in the past couple of decades.
Not coincidentally, this has also been the period when cable broadcast news (primarily Fox News) has become a bully pulpit for conspiracy theories, denigration of blocs of human beings, use of hate tropes, and partisan support of political candidates and parties. The product that prime-time Fox News disseminates is not “news” but entertainment and propaganda.
Enormous and un-paid-for Fox News promotion coupled with the soapbox offered by social media giant Twitter, basically enabled the successful Trump for President campaign in 2016. Following the campaign, Fox News became the mouthpiece for the Trump Administration and Fox News personalities became the de-facto Press Secretaries and chief advisors to Mr. Trump. The President spent less of his time presidenting than Tweeting lies, slanders, and tropes designed to excite his political base.
This situation is undoubtedly not what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they included “freedom of the press” in the 1st Amendment. The press was, at that time, composed of regular citizens/businessmen/amateur journalists who brought to light goings on in society and in government. It was thought that a strong press, keeping tabs on our elected officials, was critical to a working democracy. For the first two hundred years of this country, the press was considered “The Fourth Estate” of our republic, an essential component along with the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government.
The role of the Fourth Estate was to keep government honest.
We now have broadcast media using their “free speech” freedom to editorialize on political matters, disseminate misinformation, distribute conspiracy theories, incite anger and hate, help elect political candidates, and act as a cheerleader and prop for the Executive Branch of government.
The hateful stuff in the Buffalo pyschopath’s manifesto is remarkably similar to the filthy conspiracy theories and hateful racism that has been promulgated by Fox News over the past couple of decades.
Amazingly, in today’s world, this kind of “journalism” seems to be acceptable under current interpretation of free speech and freedom of the press… even though it is designed to be hurtful and inflammatory, things that the American judicial system have ruled for two hundred years to be not covered by freedoms granted under the 1st Amendment.
The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution guarantees American citizens the freedom to keep and bear arms (i.e. weapons). This freedom was considered essential back in the late 18th century as the new republic had just weathered a war with Britain, who knows when they might come back to reclaim the former colonies, and guns would be needed to tame the primitive American frontier. In addition, there was the possibility that the experiment with democracy wouldn’t pan out, an authoritarian government would emerge, and that local and state militias might have to be reconstituted to reclaim citizen freedoms.
These were good reasons for the 2nd Amendment protections.
Of course, America became a great nation, the frontier was settled, and the United States now has, by far, the strongest military in the world. The need for each household to possess deadly weapons is thereby diminished manyfold.
The biggest problem we have now with the 2nd Amendment is the proliferation of deadly weapons in our country, stimulated by the scare tactics of the arms industry (the National Rifle Association). The constant drumbeat of NRA propaganda, and the support of politicians who get campaign funds from the NRA, has resulted in an America that is armed to the teeth, with more than one gun per capita. That is far more than any industrialized country in the world.
Not surprisingly, we have more gun violence here, too. Typically, it is familial blood being shed, either through suicide or via arguments between husband, wife, and children that escalate into fatal incidents. We also see gun violence occurring between street gangs and criminals. More often, non-family gun violence is Black on Black, Brown on Brown, or White on White.
The least common occurrence is gun violence where the criminal is attacking a stranger. However, this is the nightmare that the NRA uses to scare people into acquiring guns for their household protection.
Why? Probably so that the gun manufacturers can sell more guns.
Skeptical? In the United Kingdom (those guys that we gained independence from), gun ownership is less than 5 per 100,000 people; in the United States, it is 120 per 100,000 people. In 2017, there were almost 11,000 deaths from gun crime in the U.S., while only 33 in the U.K.
The inescapable conclusion: more guns equals more gun violence.
What the Founding Fathers never anticipated was the lethality of weapons that we have now nor the ability of young people to possess same. It is now common for gun enthusiasts, criminals, and psychologically-impaired individuals to possess weapons that can kill scores of people in seconds. These military-grade weapons were designed for one purpose: to kill human beings easily and quickly. They are not built this way for hunting game: what kind of “sport” would that be?
It is possible, and even legal, for very young people to get their hands on such weapons and, because of their immaturity, raging hormones, and bad judgment, do stupid and impulsive things… like shoot people with guns.
Oftentimes, these young adults, who are not of a legal age to own a gun, use one of their parents’ weapons, have a friend provide them with one, or use fake I.D. in the purchase. In some locales, it is easier for a teenager to acquire a semi-automatic weapon that score a dime bag of marijuana.
Did the Founding Fathers intend for teenagers to easily “keep and bear” military-grade weapons? It is doubtful.
By the way, what are the “arms” that we have the freedom to possess? The general definition would be weapons. The N.R.A. and gun rights advocates feel that the 2nd Amendment freedom is absolute and should allow citizens to openly carry lethal weapons. That certainly wasn’t the practice in the 13 original colonies, and only in Western movies did every guy in town adorn himself with a holstered gun.
Does “arms” include military-grade weapons? How about hand grenades? How about rocket propelled grenades? Bazookas? Flame throwers? Bouncing Bettis and Claymore mines?
The Buffalo teenager/psychopath/doofus was wearing military tactical clothing including bulletproof armored vest and helmet.
Do the gun rights advocates who advocate Constitutional Carry (unlimited ability to be armed anywhere and anytime) believe that they should be able to be so attired and armed when they enter a school, bank, police station, court, or Capitol building?
Can you imagine passing a guy outfitted and strapped like this on the sidewalk in your neighborhood? I would be afraid to look him in the eye, smile, smirk, fart, or belch lest he take offense and lay waste to me.
Maybe that’s the point of the gun rights folks: they want to be bullies, making ordinary people afraid of them?
We live in a very scary time when a large bloc of Americans insists on its freedom to say and do whatever it wants, including intimidating and harming other Americans.
This is not what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they declared the unalienable rights of “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness”.