INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. – An Indiana state representative has drafted a bill that would require journalists to acquire licenses from state police.

Republican Rep. Jim Lucas drew up the bill earlier this year and told the IndyStar he may file it to raise a point about his signature issue, gun rights.

Lucas 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 told the IndyStar.

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.

A panel of lawmakers is now reviewing the idea ahead of next year’s legislative session. The proposal, however, may be more rhetorical than serious. He is coy about whether he actually plans to file it.

“It depends on you guys,” he told IndyStar in June. “It depends on how egregious and irresponsible you are between now and then.”

 

So this guy wants to make a right guaranteed by the Constitution into a privelige licenced by the State.
Where are the open carry 2nd Amendment supporters now?

 

Right here.

This legislation will be just as difficult to enforce as gun laws are to enforce, but I damn sure like the idea of it.

The leftist media holds a deep compassion and contempt against the 2nd, while they deeply cherish the 1st.

 

Which makes you as bad on the right as they are on the left.
The Constitution isn't a buffet where you can pick and choose what you like or can say that some people are more or less deserving of the rights it guarantees. You take it whole and keep it intact or you get the heck out and go looking for one you like.

 

I whole-heartedly agree.

The prohibition era created a host of controversial amendment issues.

Altering the Constitution/Bill of Rights, is and was a recipe for disaster for individual rights...on a federal level

However, States do have the right to create legislation, there is nothing un-Constitutional about that.

 

There is if it violates a constitutional amendment. Like freedom of the press. That one is spelled out in clear and unambiguous English. Unlike the nearly unintelligible mess Hamilton made of the 2nd.
And don't go thinking I'm anti gun. I own a Baretta 92fs 9mm, an S&W M&P Shield .45 and an S&W model 36 .38

 

All the Amendments were crystal clear when they were written.

Hamilton?...really?

 

Sorry, ment Madison. And the 2nd is a couple of ideas mashed together clumsily compared to the writing of the First. But maybe he was short on coffee and pulling an all nighter like I am right now.

 

This brings a whole new prespective to ‘hate speech.’

Not the racial kind, that shit should be illegal. I’m talking about your typical political commentary.

That shit is full of hate these days...