The Consequences Of The First Amendment

943 Words4 Pages
The first Amendment is the freedom of speech, and the freedom of the press. Which has the press right to report what they know, or have information on. But in my eyes they over step those boundaries, when they put other people in harm’s way. The right to the people, “which is me and all other citizens”; I have the right as a citizen, to know the truth, and nothing but the truth. So why is it that the media only give us what gets us fired up? I do think in my own option, that the press will and does over step their boundaries on getting what they want or need, and not caring what could happen because they don’ look at the consequences that would and could happen. To me the laws of the press need to be enforced a little harder, to protect the innocent people that do not have the rights to privacy. Like the tabloids, where do they get by taking pictures of people that are not them, or to invade their privacy, and not get in trouble over it? I don’t understand where they can get away with that except for…show more content…
This is where I think that the law needs to be a little stricter with this amendment, only for the fact is how many people need to die, before this is change? So now let’s consider the Princess Diana crash. Even though that the driver may or may, not of be under the influence, but because they were being chased, by the press at a high rate of speed, where was the amendment then? I do not think that it’s right that they were in that position, because of money. Just to get a picture, because they were out and about. Don’t we have the right to privacy? Yes, I believe we do. I do not understand who benefited from this tragic death. The three were among a group of photographers pursuing the car carrying the Princess and Dodi Fayed when it crashed in a Paris underpass at the end of August 1997, killing the couple and the
Open Document