Sunday, March 13, 2005

Bloggers: Have You Applied for Your Reporting License?

One of the more shopworn arguments in the civilian disarmament playbook says the Founders were talking about muskets when they penned the Second Amendment, and they could not possibly have conceived of the terrible firepower of today’s weaponry—to which our side generally replies they couldn’t have conceived of modern communications technology when establishing the First Amendment, yet no one is suggesting limits on free speech.

Right.

While bloggers have rightly bared their teeth at the recent McCain-Feingold trial balloon, there’s another looming threat that hasn’t generated much of a response on 2A sites I frequent: the state assuming it is the sole arbiter of who among us will be recognized as a “journalist.”

Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Kleinberg has again raised this issue, and we need to pay attention to his ruling, especially the part where he writes “Defining what is a 'journalist' has become more complicated as the variety of media has expanded."

Judge, I don’t see that being your call. You have no legitimate authority to issue de facto reporting permits. The only argument in this case should be whether the rights of another, in this case, Apple, via alleged theft and dissemination of their proprietary trade secrets, have been violated.

We all know of the many instances where the internet community covers vital liberty issues that are ignored by the lapdog Establishment press, especially in its coverage of citizens persecuted for taking the Second Amendment at its word. Case in point--don’t expect CBS or The Los Angeles Times to tell us about BATFU incompetence almost destroying a man’s life.

If we independents are muffled, the only thing you’ll hear about such cases is how an antisocial threat to society has been removed by heroic community helpers.

How very Red Chinese.

No comments: