Are the cities that have these restrictive laws ...also cities where you have fewer people able to protect themselves from crime?

[u]sing the military for domestic law enforcement...is a terrible idea....because soldiers are warriors, not peace officers.

You are talking about giving the executive branch broader authority to create these exclusion zones which could cover broad areas and last for days [during an event ].

When a robbery victim does not defend himself, the robber succeeds 88 percent of the time, and the victim is injured 25 percent of the time. When a victim resists with a gun, the robbery success rate falls to 30 percent, and the victim injury rate falls to 17 percent. No other response to a robbery -- from drawing a knife to shouting for help to fleeing -- produces such low rates of victim injury and robbery success.

I think the concerns about free speech in areas where the president is speaking long pre-date Bush. They were an issue in the Clinton administration, the first Bush administration and began as an issue during Reagan. I do think the ACLU has legitimate concerns about the breadth of the new language and how it could be applied.

Before you take the data from this study and say 'we should leap out to say this proves we should have national licensing and registration' it would be useful to know one of the things they didn't look at, which was. 'Does licensing and registration also depress gun ownership by law abiding people?