Came across this today from the NRA Site: http://www.nraila.org/News/Read/NewsReleases.aspx?ID=11779 Seems like this could potentially lead to some opposing constitutional interpretations re: Foreign Nationals and Homeland Security. Some opponents of various national security measures have argued that constitutional protections do not start and stop with citizenship, while proponents have argued "yes, they do". In the broader security context (which I believe is smack in the middle of the spirit of the 2nd) - what implications could this have? Personally - I have to side with Washington on this one. Not to raise the alarms here, but I can think of 19 guys not all that long ago who came to this country legally, and at one point would have passed a simple background check. 19 guys who are PRECISELY the people we do NOT want to have guns on our soil. As citizens, we have to pass a background check to buy firearms. There is an expectation of accuracy to that system, as all states are operating on the same page, and contributing to the same system in a reasonably reliable fashion. The same cannot be said for foreign countries. To me, it seems this may open the door to allow potentially violent criminals to take advantage of our open society. In the worst case, they could use that openness directly against us. There is however the possibility, and I can only assume this is the NRA's position - that this could be the beginning of a slippery slope. The question is - is there a line, and where should/would it be drawn?