^^^ What makes you think these jokers require evidence? Owning large amounts of ammo is perfectly legal, what I'm talking about is bringing scrutiny. For example, say you're a crusading reporter with an anti-gun prejudice (aren't they all). Say you want to run a story about the dangerous and anti-social gun-nuts who are harboring large ammo and weapons caches, and decide to use these postings in your story as proof this is happening. Now say you're a Marcus Oshiro type who decides to use this story as an excuse to pass ammo sales registration or limits legislation. Who is the loser? Furthermore, what makes you think the leftist authoritarians in our governments care about things like Constitutionality, and what counts as evidentiary? They certainly haven't cared about such things in furthering their agendas in the past. They think the Constitution is a living document they can mold and finesse and end-run to fit their goals. Just because they are limited by some Constitutional restraints now doesn't mean they will be in the future. One more thing, any anonymity you think you may have as a 'random screen name', is a total illusion. Unless you are a well versed in computer geek, and taking radical precautions to hide your identity, it is a snap to obtain knowledge of who you are via your internet postings; it's pretty much a snap for governments to do regardless.