On Jan. 31, a two-year, $1 million research project conducted by the University of Connecticut concluded, yielding some terrifying results. This survey of over 100,000 high school students, 8,000 teachers and 500 administrators across the United States was called "The Future of the First Amendment."As the United States continues to fight wars for freedom in foreign countries and as the Bush administration constantly reminds us how much the terrorists hate freedom, high school students across the country are unaware and unappreciative of the amendment guaranteeing us freedom of speech, assembly, the press and religion. According to the survey, nearly 75 percent of high school students either do not know about the First Amendment or claim they take it for granted.

And that isn't even the scary part. More than a third of students surveyed said they believe our freedom of speech goes "too far," and 17 percent said that people should not be allowed to express unpopular views. Half of the students believed the media should have to have stories pre-approved by the government.

According to the teachers and principals surveyed, these beliefs stem from shortfalls in our educational system. Students who have taken classes dealing with journalism are much more likely to appreciate their First Amendment rights, but sparse budgets prevent schools from providing such classes.

But insufficient education is not the only cause. Was our educational system really that much better 50 years ago? Of course, people say that the future is doomed because of the younger generations' ignorance and apathy, but what generation hasn't had that said about them?

I'm not willing to dismiss the dot-com generation so quickly; we are no more stupid than any other. There must be a reason, however, that today's youth is so unconcerned with the most basic pillars of freedom in American society.

The way politicians toss around the word "freedom" doesn't help. The Bush administration's main strength is its ability to sell its agenda to the public, and freedom is the buzzword of the new millennium. If the surveyed students had been asked the importance of freedom, their responses likely would have been overwhelmingly positive. The First Amendment, however, has been packaged as obsolete obstruction to the war against terror.

But that isn't the main reason. High school students may suffer from an overabundance of freedom. While our age group reached maturity on the cusp of the Internet revolution, current high-schoolers have had Instant Messenger screen names since they were able to read. These kids have had immediate access to pretty much every piece of information (and misinformation) out there, and have been able to say absolutely anything in chat rooms and blogs without any repercussions.

Maybe today's high school students are so inundated with freedoms that they've had enough. This generation can't understand the implications of oppressed thought, and instead of worrying about protecting everybody's freedom of speech, it seems most youths would rather somebody narrow down information for them. That they believe the government should be the one to do this is disconcerting.

But even if there was somebody who could narrow what information is true and what is false, is it possible that we have taken our freedom of speech too far?

Yes, of course, women deserve rights, and the feminist movement helped women gain freedom. And because of their struggle, women are now completely free to shake their breasts in front of a Girls Gone Wild camera. The most violent video game we used to play was Duck Hunt (and that's only violent if you're playing with the vice president). Now, Grand Theft Auto is one of my favorite video games-but could glorifying the murder of police officers put real cops in danger? And as we fight for freedom and democracy abroad, terrorists in Hamas and the anti-American Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez have gained political power in legitimate, democratic elections.

The kids make a point when they say some things would be better off if we limited free speech. I would love to have an unbiased, all-knowing fact-checker to censor false information. But such a person does not exist, and giving the power to limit our freedoms to any individual or institution is begging for tyranny and oppression. That's why the First Amendment exists.

As a liberal, it's no surprise that I stand fully in favor of full protection of our First Amendment rights. But at the same time, I believe that there should be limitations on the Second Amendment; the right to bear arms doesn't mean that everyone should own an Uzi. Maybe today's high schoolers are trying to tell us the same thing about our First Amendment.