Pay very careful attention to Mr. Henry Bowman, he's well aware of the unintended consequences of these types of laws & regulations.

I always enjoy folks who make these sort of comments. What might seem, with little thought or reflection, to make sense, often turns out to be just the opposite of what was intended when all of the potential consequences are factored into the equation.

It's rather like people who think that there is no potential population problem (no, I'm not screaming that we're running out of room on the planet) because the world's population lives on only X small percent of the world's land, leaving most available land unpopulated. By unthinking logic, they're absolutely right. Mathematically, the world's population does live on a small proportion of the available land. Unfortunately, there are very good reasons why that is so. Much of the rest of that land is swamp, desert, mountain ranges, public lands, farm land (rather a precious resource) volcanos, even areas that while potentially habitable, have no real access to water and other essentials.

So it's true that under a five mile rule, some gun shops could exist. But who wants to travel to the middle of a swamp, a desert, or climb to the peak of a Colorado mountain to buy a few rounds of ammo?

My little town is less than five miles long by less than five miles wide . . . . considerably less. The proposed five-mile circles wouldn't allow a gun store anywhere in the town. That would probably irk the Mayor, who owns a shop specializing in black powder a block over from the high school.

see http://blog.ryjones.org/2008/02/23/obama-exclusion-zone-king-county/
for a more concrete example

I know there's no logic to it , but has anyone, anywhere, gone to a gun store, bought a gun, then gone to the nearest school and shot anyone, or even waved the gun around? This seems like another "sounds ok til you think about it" law, one that solves no real problem and only penalizes the good guys, prevents no crime, makes no child safer.

Had to happen! Brief scare on SCOTUS Heller Opinion! LOL!

REASON.COM

http://reason.com/blog/show/126938.html

Comments Section:

Jamie Kelly | June 9, 2008, 4:43pm | #

AP News Alert

WASHINGTON (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld the broad ban on gun ownership in the nation's capital, delivering a blow to Second Amendment advocates in a decision that will have widespread ramifications on gun policy nationwide.

Same Topic as REASON.COM, but serious at DesertConservative.com.
http://www.desertconservative.com/2008/06/09/activists-seek-to-gut-us-constitution/

Black Activist Asks: If Courts Can Gut Second Amendment, How Can We Assume 13th Amendment Ban on Slavery is Safe?

Who is Henry Bowman and why should I care what he thinks?

If a child is home schooled it is necessary in some states for the parent to create a "school" for the child. I wonder if those numerous "schools" show up on maps like this. But regardless of issues like this it should be clear to anyone that anybody that supports a law like this just thinks all guns are evil and will ban them all if he gets a chance. And if he can't ban them all he'll get any law he can to make them as expensive and difficult to own as he possibly can, with the end game of reducing political support enough that they can all be banned.

Henry Bowman is the protaganist in John Ross's _Unintended Consequences_, a book the BATFE REALLY dislikes...

OK. Thanks. I pretty much limit my recreational reading to firearms reference manuals, military history, and reloading manuals, so I haven't read "UI."

I know there's no logic to it , but has anyone, anywhere, gone to a gun store, bought a gun, then gone to the nearest school and shot anyone, or even waved the gun around? This seems like another "sounds ok til you think about it" law, one that solves no real problem...

If asked, the proposers will explain it is for the same reason that they won't allow a bar inside so many feet of a church, or a strip club inside so many feet of a school. It's a moral thing -- the innocent should not be exposed to evils. Of course, the subtext here is that the purchase of a gun is evil, and children should not be exposed to the possibility of seeing it. Even if they have to walk five miles to do so.

When Dave Kopel flagged this proposal some time ago on Volokh, I did some quickie looking at several maps. Assuming (1) "parks" include everything from small community parks through National Parks, and (2) "schools" include both public and private/parochial, it appears from my initial glance at admittedly incomplete data that there may be literally no place in the Northeast Corridor from Southern New Hampshire to at least Richmond/Petersburg, Virginia in which a gun store could be located.

What a brilliantly diabolical strategy.

I CANNOT see how someone with the back ground he has, what he says or even stands for, got to be in the running for ANYTHING! America in in enough trouble with it's economical and crime problems without a sorry excuse like him in a critical position as president.

i think this is just ridiculous. this should bring a severe outcry at this type of legislation. this is just another way of big brother trying to control your life. this kind of legislation should not even be considered in a "free" country.