Ah – the ole Brady wishlist.

Let’s break it down.

#1 Mandatory criminal background checks for all gun sales

Right. And all book sales should go through a Federally licensed dealer, too (there are some dangerous books out there). This is because we want the Federal Government to be able to regulate the sales of provate property (that way they can better tax it). GREAT IDEA!

#2 Require responsible and safe gun storage for all firearms unless they are in the owners direct control

While an excellent idea for individuals, it can’t be mandatory (see DC v. Heller). Also, in light of the 4th Amendment, how do you expect to enforce this?

#3 Allow Law Enforcement to maintain and share critical “crime-gun” trace data

This is an unfounded attack on the Tihart Amendment. Law enforcement already has access to trace data. All they have to do is access it. They CAN’T use it for fishing expeditions though (there’s that pesky 4th Amendment again).

#4 Restore and improve the Federal Ban on Assault Weapons

Uh huh…. If the Second Amendment applies to any weapons, it’s surely these. There is no mention of duck hunting in the Constitution.

#5 Repeal the Federal law giving Immunity to the gun industry

Riiiight….because it’s important that a manufacturer be responsible for the downstream criminal misuse of his product.

#6 Enact National Consumer Product Safety Commission regulations for firearms

Firearms are already subject to Tort law. This a blatant attempt to “regulate them out of existence”.

#7 Create incentives for the gun industry to make “personalized guns”

Absolutely. A genius idea. Because when my life is on the line, the first thing I want to see when I pick up my pistol is a flashing light asking, “reboot?”. No thanks.

jd:

Your flippant response to item #1 above speaks volumes. You compare guns with books? Nice! Now, how about addressing the concept of requiring background checks prior to purchasing a firearm from anyone in the business of selling firearms (including firearms purchased at shows).

JFarmer,

Would you advocate the above restrictions if you substituted in any other right protected by the Bill of Rights?

Books can be dangerous, all sorts of ideas not approved by the government can be learned from them.

How changing #7 to read : Create incentives for the publishing industry to make “personalized books/magazines/newspapers”

I don’t know of the exact laws but people who write books aren’t held liable if anyone uses those ideas for crimes….do we need to change #5: Repeal the Federal law giving Immunity to the publishing industry

I like the idea of number 2, let’s require safe storage of all published items, can’t have kids reading about freedom or free love or the failed attempts at communism, marxism, and socialism without parental supervision, right?
#2 Require responsible and safe books storage for all books unless they are in the owners direct control

When you use other protected rights in place of firearms, it really shows how silly and unconstitutional the proposed laws are.

It’s a new feature. If you mention someone by name, the comment goes to moderation. Somehow I fear that this was implemented to save whatshisname from embarassment when we point out his failures, foibles and falsehoods. He does take himself so seriously…

Guns are products protected under the 2nd Amendment.
Books are products protected under the 1st Amendment.

Please James, explain how this comparison is flippant. Maybe you should start by explaining what YOU mean by flippant. Eh?

Or “blank“.

If you don’t like the comparison to books, how about the Freedom to worship or not as you choose?

Want to have to have a background check before anyone can preach/transfer a sermon?

How about all religious materials must be transferred through licensed ministers?

Don’t like freedom of religion, how about freedom of speech?

The Heller Decision invalidated Washington D.C. handgun ban, part of D.C. argument was that other firearms weren’t banned, right? Is is acceptable for the government to ban verbal communication because written communication is still allowed?
Or that you have to have a permit to speak in public? Not to make a public speech, but just have a conversation? The right to carry a firearm in public related to the right to be able to speak in public, is that a fair comparison?
Before you go there, I think more crimes have been committed by word of mouth then have been with firearms, so there is a reason to limit free speech.

The gang bangers aren’t using commercially available rifles that I can purchase, they are using fully automatic rifles aquired elsewhere and smuggled into the country via our non existent borders. Guess what the type of guns they are using have been illegal without a federal permit since 1968. Get the progressive politics out of our justice system and start punishing people for their crimes, not giving them cable TV and a gym and the crime rates will go down. The Bill of Rights is for the people, the 2nd ammendment is the only one that allows us access to protect ourselves.