><snip>
>
>>>>Yeah - you're proving my point. It was written 200+ years ago - when it was actually possible for a group of armed citizens to fight off a group of armed military personal. If you want to apply the 2nd Amendment as it was intended 200 years ago to today's standards then every American should be able to own a F-14 fighter plan and atomic weapons too.
>>>
>>>While your specific example of the F-14 is not presently available, your general point is not as valid as you seem to imply. Private citizens can and do own military grade weapons and vehicles, including fighter jets.
>>>http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.10/kirlin.html
>>
>>You're incorrect. A citizen can not own anti-aircraft weapons, nukes, grenade launchers..etc. A MiG with all the weapons removed is not quite the same thing.
>
>I don't think you needed to take the discussion nuclear. ;)
>
>Grenade launchers are NFA weapons just like fully automatic weapons. While there is a rigirous & expensive registration process, a private citizen may own them and even make them if they wish.
>
>Here's the ATF Form 1 : http://www.atf.gov/forms/download/atf-f-5320-1.pdf
>Here's a website that tracks the registry : http://www.nfatracker.com/
>Here's a How-to for the form if you feel like making your own : http://www.guntrustlawyer.com/form1.html
>
>>>There's a MiG (not sure what type specifically) which can be seen flying in & out of The former Mather Air Base here in Sacramento on a daily basis. I've heard that the owner is a big-time lawyer who spends a lot of time at the State Capital who lives in S California and uses the jet for his commute. He flys over the highway I use to get to and from work every day.
>>
>>WOW. Well that's one way to cut the commute time!
>
>Money may not buy happiness, but it sure makes things easier. ;)
>
>>>>>>My big complaint is the politicians have blackballed the ATF from being able to enforce the laws we have and the NRA is behind it. It's not about rights or protecting people - it's about money and selling more guns (at any cost to society).
>>>>>
>>>>>Everything politicians do is related to money. No surprise there. If you want to limit the influence of money on politicians then limit politicians power. The money will head to more profitible ventures.
>>>>
>>>>Ok look - saying "well this is just business as usual" is not an acceptable argument for allowing the NRA to screw up the ATF. Did you actually watch the video? The ATF can't even keep a simple database that would ...OMG just watch the video.
>>>
>>>I did watch the video.
>>>
>>>I do not agree with the idea of national centralized databases of individual citizens be it for guns, fingerprints, medical conditions or parking tickets. It's a gross invasion of privacy and contrary to the founding principals of this country.
>>
>>Interesting point of view. So you don't think that database we have that keeps all the criminals fingerprints should exist huh? Seems like that would sort of ..ummm... a really bad idea. Do you understand the benefits of having a centralized database of guns and gun sales transactions? I'm a strong believer in privacy as well - but there are limits to this thinking. If all these bad gun transactions can be traced to just 1% of the gun dealers, don't you think it would be nice to weed out those 1% of bad dealers that are screwing it up for everyone else? It comes down to privacy vs safety perhaps? Of course this is easy for me to say because I've never owned a gun so I won't be showing up in this database - but hey if I DID ever decide to get one I wouldn't care if that info was in some government database either.
>>Let me ask you this - what is the harm in having the database? What possible problem would that cause any legal gun owner? What sort of evil-doings by the feds to you envision that would somehow effect your privacy as a result of this? Ok so the feds know you have a gun. - big deal who cares? So what if they know?
>>Isn't it W.K. out here that has friends that are cops? I wonder what his take on this is. As matter of fact I haven't heard any police organizations commenting on this at all now that I think about it...
>>
>>Years ago I had the idea that before any new gun is sold that they record the ballistics of each gun and keep that information in a database. That way anytime a crime occurs and you can salvage a bullet from the crime scene you'd know right then who's gun was used. Think of how handy that would be!
>
>I was going to respond point-by-point, however, a headline from yesterday has answered for me.
>http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2013-01-22/news/os-law-enforcement-access-databases-20130119_1_law-enforcement-officers-law-enforcers-misuse
>
>As for fingerprinting specifically:
>http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18560_162-563607.html

Yes there is always a potential for misuse of any database. Frankly I'd rather have some curious cop looking up my info rather than have some wacko shooting at me - but none-the-less I agree that it's a problem that would have to be dealt with. I think that since all of us out here are computer savy folks I don't need to go into controlling access and such.