... professional sports in which the adult athletes compete for pay and monetary prizes, Pete. I can't think of another such sport for which "licenses" are required.

> Many states license the ownership of handguns, this is in effect a license on the sport of shooting ...

Arguably that's correct, though one can participate in sport shooting without owning a gun. Therefore, the handgun licensing requirement would not necessarily bar participation, even for someone who is ineligible to obtain the requisite license.

> And of course we can debate about whether hunting is a sport, but there are hunting and
> fishing licenses (while their primary purpose is revenue generation they can be revoked or
> declined for "bad conduct").

An argument can be made that there is a public safety component to the licensing of hunting (though not fishing). I'm not that familiar anymore with hunting/fishing license requirements -- can they be revoked or declined for bad conduct unrelated to the licensing requirement itself?

> And then we can address the issue of school athletes. Many Public High Schools have created
> student athlete rules that govern players conduct (both on and off the field) and
> effectively operate as a licensing system.

We could quibble over whether or not this is really a "licensing" system. But, assuming that it is the functional equivalent, there is one consideration that is substantially different than the boxing example -- the school requirements are to participate in events being run by the school. This is essentially the same thing as, e.g., the NFL's rules of conduct for football players, MLB's for baseball, etc. The fact that the schools happen to be governmental organizations doesn't change that (I concede that someone has to establish rules, or there wouldn't be much of a sport).

> That being said you of course know what I think of those licenses.

Yes, on that I'm sure we're in complete agreement.

----- jim o\-S