Steven Linstad

Political Science

The First Amendment is the biggest freedom that is at risk in the

United States, in other words, our freedom of speech. It is so at risk because
the federal government has grown too strong, causing it to feel it has the
ability to silence citizens who would oppose its power. Admittedly, some of
the amendments in the constitution need to be interpreted in order to relate
to the 21st century lifestyle, but other amendments dont need to be. For
example, theres the second amendment which states: A well-regulated
Militia, being necessary to the security of a Free State, the right of the people
to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. It is my belief that the men
who amended the constitution put the second amendment as the right to bear
arms because they were preparing the citizens of the future to defend themselves.
How has our freedom of speech been threatened? A recent incident has occurred that the
whole world has listened to, the most significant leak in U.S history, by Edward Snowden. Mr.
Snowden was working for NSA (National Security Agency). Snowden traded encrypted emails
with Glenn Greenwald of the famous British newspaper, The Guardian. These emails detailed
secrets the NSA and their British black-ops surveillance program partner, GCHQ (Government
Communications Headquarters). These emails contained information about various programs run
inside of NSA and GCHQ. According to The William and Mary Bill of Rights Journal by
Sandra Davidson and David Herrera, Mr. Greenwald knew he would be put on Americas by
publishing the leaked information. Glenn Greenwald sensing the legal risk he might face in
America has followed a strategy to try to provide wikileaks with first Amendment protection.

People were outraged at Snowden and others were outraged at what he revealed; he was looked
at as a hero and a traitor at the same time. To the U.S government, Snowden had committed
espionage and theft of government property. On the other hand he has sacrificed a well-paying
job in Hawaii to preserve basic American freedoms. Although some people say that Snowden
violated the oath he took to get his job at NSA by revealing all this information to the public. Its
the truth, Snowden did violate the oath he took, but there is someone else who has violated his
oath in this controversy. Barack Obama. The presidential oath has little room for interpretation
because it is short and to the point; as the president, Barack Obama must preserve, protect, and
defend the constitution. According to this youtube video of an interview with Obama, Obama
on Snowden: I will not be Scrambling Jets. Obama thinks that the countries are in some kind of
International community, it also seems that Barack is sort of passively asking for whoever is
holding Snowden in Asylum to extradite him back to the United States. Because Obama
attempted to capture Snowden for speaking freely in the press, doesnt that mean he violated his
oath as well? Absolutely, but the spotlight is on Snowden. The United States government claims
that Snowden is a taitor for publishing information in the press that could compromise parts of
the military. Yet on the other hand Snowden has let Americans know that the government is
always keeping tabs on its citizens.
The second most at risk Amendment is the Second Amendment; the right to bear arms.
The argument that anti-gun protestors use are the domestic attacks that spring from allowing
citizens to carry fire arms. For example, the attack at Columbine High School in April of 1992;
anti-gun activists say that if guns had been outlawed at the time lives could have been saved. I
have to disagree, as guns were only a small part in this attack. According to the journal
Reclaiming Children and Youth one of the friends of the attackers felt that they terrorized the

school with violence because they were bullied, Brown clearly attributes the shooting to the
bullying that students such as Klebold and he received on a daily basis in Littleton's schools.
Guns are not to blame for this massacre, but bullying. If guns had been completely outlawed at
the time then the attackers would have come up with alternate weapons, maybe weapons that are
even more dangerous than guns.
The first Amendment is far more at risk than the Second Amendment, because it is easier
for the government to censor what you can or cannot say as opposed to taking away your guns. A
poll conducted by Michael Catalini and Peter Bell, Poll: Is Edward Snowden a Whistle-Blower
or a Traitor? states that two votes were taken between the Republican and Democratic parties.
For the Democratic Party, 46% said he was a whistle blower and 54% said he was a traitor. For
the Republican party 29% said he was a whistle blower and 71% said he was a traitor. I was
shocked when I read these statistics; the majority of our representatives think Snowden is a
traitor for telling the public that the government is spying on them! And that snowden didnt
have the right to tell anyone about the classified information he acquired, that he took an oath to
safeguard our governments secrets. Since when did oaths trump our constitutional rights? In
America, over 500 billion dollars is spent on the military. And unless you dont know already,
thats the highest military budget in the world! People are more willing to give up what they can
say, rather than what they can shoot.
The First and Second Amendment are still important to our daily lives. Countries that are
for the most part run by dictatorships dont have these basic rights in their government. In some
of these countries you can be beheaded simply because of something you say. The instant that
we start limiting the First and Second Amendment, is the same instant that we start becoming a
country that beheads people for using their freedom of speech.

Bibliography:
Catalini, Michael, and Peter Bell. " EBSCOhost: Poll: Is Edward Snowden a Whistle-Blower or a
Traitor?." EBSCO Publishing Service Selection Page. N.p., 14 June 2013. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
<http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=22&sid=64577155-54bf-41b9-bb25192a6e6bc892%40sessionmgr11&hid=4&bd
Sandra Davidson and David Herrera, Needed: More Than a Paper Shield, 20 Wm. & Mary Bill
Rts. J. 1277 (2012), http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol20/iss4/8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwFyDYh9a5o
Thompson, Mark. "

EBSCOhost: HOW TO SAVE A TRILLION DOLLARS." EBSCO

Publishing Service Selection Page. N.p., 25 Apr. 2011. Web. 18 Oct. 2013.
<http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=24&sid=64577155-54bf-41b9-bb25192a6e6bc892%40sessionmgr11&hid=4&b