A quantum of umbrage: What part of "shall make no law" is too complicated for you?

The Second Amendment may be a grammatical dog's breakfast, but the First Amendment couldn't be clearer if it was a buttonhook in the well water.

Which is what is so irritating about this:

The Post and Courier of Charleston reported Tuesday afternoon that state Rep. Mike Pitts (R) had introduced a bill called the “South Carolina Responsible Journalism Registry Law.” Reporter Gavin Jackson posted a summary of the bill — which includes “fines and criminal penalties for violation of the chapter” — on Twitter, but wrote that the full text was not yet available.

Naturally, if Rep. Pitts wanted to register only <airquotes> responsible </airquotes> gun owners, his political career would be over in a New York minute, so to speak.

Once again: Even First Amendment purists like me accept certain reasonable restrictions: Time, place, and manner; libel, slander, and perjury; false advertising; clear and present danger (once again, you Tom Clancy fanboys, a First Amendment trigger, not a Second). The First Amendment brought down Nixon. What has the Second Amendment done for us lately, except makes Starbucks and federal bird sanctuaries a safe haven for gun-totin', Constitution-misquotin'. self-deludin', snack-beggin' yahoos?

Meanwhile, back in the state that fired first on Fort Sumter, they're worrying that unregistered journalists are the existential threat to our nation, not the seditionists who are illegally bunked in at a federal bird sanctuary in Oregon -- and no one will make the latter face justice because they're armed to the teeth.

Coincidence? I think not.

I cite the p3 motto: May the First Amendment always triumph over the Second Amendment.