Last edited by jamesrage; 04-24-10 at 04:44 PM.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
Those are different things. Those aren't prior restraint, they're just restraint. Assuming those regulations are constitutional, a background check to make sure someone meets them certainly is. It's simply verifying. If you're under 18 and can't vote yet, it's not prior restraint on the right to vote to check your ID beforehand, even if you're actually over 18.What about permit/license and registration requirements for free speech,surely as long as you do those things your right to free speech is unrestrained.
1) someone else with a similar name has a felony
2) you are in a job that has alot of background inquiries--ie a court security officer, trust officer at a bank, federal agent etc
3) the clown at the BCI screws up
I have seen hundreds of delays where the person was not a criminal
If the regulations are constitutional, then making someone wait is worth keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them. That's the assumption inherent in the regulations anyway.
This is a bit like the "no-fly" list to stop terrorists from getting on planes. Some innocent people get caught up in it, but that doesn't mean we should scrap the list altogether.