[eddie willers]

Do you think a child should be able to walk into Wal-Mart (alone) and purchase a sidearm?
Should an Amazon.com computer ship out an order for a high-powered rifle to any address?

Any rational, adult non-felon shall not have his or her right to keep and bear arms infringed in any manner.

Proving that you are the person you claim to be (with no record of the transaction required to kept on any file or computer) is not unreasonable.

Will it do much good?
I doubt it.

About a month before Whitman's Texas Tower adventure, Richard Speck strangled 8 nurses in Chicago.

But neither do I see it doing any harm.

If you have a convincing arguement otherwise, or can show a violation of the 2nd Amendment, I'm all ears.

[coloradan]

Do you think a child should be able to walk into Wal-Mart (alone) and purchase a sidearm?

This was the law of the land prior to 1968; the country somehow managed to survive nearly 200 years with this policy. If anyone should have a say, it's the parents who have the legal responsibility for their own children.

Should an Amazon.com computer ship out an order for a high-powered rifle to any address?

Again this was the law of the land prior to 1968. How could we have possibly made it this far?

Any rational, adult non-felon shall not have his or her right to keep and bear arms infringed in any manner.

Having to prove that oneself is not a criminal is an infringement ... you didn't answer my questions but instead are asking me some of your own. Should people have to prove who they are to worship or speak freely?

Proving that you are the person you claim to be (with no record of the transaction required to kept on any file or computer) is not unreasonable.

Well that's nice, though I disagree, but it certainly isn't what we have now: the "background check" includes make, model, and serial numbers of guns purchased - full blown registration.

Will it do much good? I doubt it.

I ask again: then why do you support it?

About a month before Whitman's Texas Tower adventure, Richard Speck strangled 8 nurses in Chicago.

S#it happens. Good thing the police were able to solicit the assistance of deer hunters to pin the guy down while they rushed him, no? Even if they hadn't, gun control wouldn't have stopped this guy, as you yourself admit. So why support it?

But neither do I see it doing any harm.

I do, it's a privacy violation. Why should I have to prove who I am, because the government releases people into society, to live among us, that it does not trust with guns?

If you have a convincing arguement otherwise,

I don't need one, you yourself admit the laws don't do work.

or can show a violation of the 2nd Amendment, I'm all ears.

If you were to look up "right" "people" "not" and "infringed" you could probably figure out the violations all by yourself. But knowing that violations occur is a far cry from having a court rule a law unconstitutional. I presume this is what you actually mean when asking me to "show" a violation. They're there, they're just not recognized (yet).

[FSPress]

Modern media has taught people well. Childern did buy guns at that time. I wonder what harm came to them. Sears and Roebuck would ship you that high-powered rifle, no questions asked. If this has been so effective, why arn't the criminals completely without guns today. Maybe it's bacuse there needs to be more, stronger laws with stiffer penalties to really get the message across. All infringement does harm!

[FSPress]

By the way there is a record that is kept on file and can be reviewed at any time. Form 4473, that you fill out to prove that you are a good person, goes into the files for 20 years. If the BATF wants to see it, they can. When the business closes those forms still on file are required to be shipped to the BATF. As the clerk at Sears said in 1968, "this is gun registration!"

[Blue Collar Christian]

Who is to set the standard for rational?

This is mostly a two part problem:

1. Known criminals are released from jail too soon.

2. The 2nd Amendment provides protection to the individual(unless you are a fan of the 9th District Court)for the right to keep and bear arms.

If you were to reverse either one of these statements, which would be most effective in preventing the use of firearms for crime?

Is this supposed to be a free country, or a controlled populace. Freedom suffers everytime Big Brother oversees another part of the individual's life. If the regulaion of gun sales is "not unreasonable" (your words)yet inaffective, ("I doubt it"(your words again)), why do you choose to support it?

If I was to set the standard for rational, YOU would not legally own guns.

[tpaine]

Any rational, adult non-felon shall not have his or her right to keep and bear arms infringed in any manner.

Adult? OK, - that a reasonable regulation on the rkba's.
Forbidding ex-felons? They shouldn't be 'ex' if they are still dangerous to society.
Rational? To give our government the power to determine the 'rationality' of non-dangerous persons is a non-rational act in itself.

Proving that you are the person you claim to be (with no record of the transaction required to kept on any file or computer) is not unreasonable. Will it do much good? I doubt it.
But neither do I see it doing any harm. If you have a convincing arguement otherwise, or can show a violation of the 2nd Amendment, I'm all ears.

The 'harm' is in allowing ~any~ level of government to exceed 'reasonable' regulations on our rights.
We allowed the feds to so exceed in both the 1934 & 1968 gun control 'acts', and we are now reaping the whirlwind in not only unreasonable fed/regs, but in CA., a state totally out of control.

[patton]

I own a large property in NY - family cabin, etc.

In VA, I have an absolute right to carry a handgun openly (where I live), and a permit to carry a handgun concealed.

In NY, I am not, as a non-state-resident, permitted to carry a handgun at all.

You may not think this is an infringement: I do. I invite you to confront a 400-lb. bear in the woods, sans gun, thirty miles from a neighbor.

Note that carrying a long gun on skis is problomatic.

[Buffalo Head]

"....high-powered rifle...."

Please define that. Also include 'low-powered rifle' and 'medium powdered rifle'.

In most places those buzz words, along with 'arsenals', 'semi-autos', 'uzi's', assault weapons, etc. are only used by the anti-gun crowd in their attempts to inflame emotion. Our side should be more selective and precise with words.

[Eaker]

Je$$e Jack$ons' right to "free speech" has caused more problems for society than guns ever could or will.

Stay safe; stay armed.