Anti-Game Senator Gets 5 Years in Prison for Political Corruption and Gun-Running

@Zerabp: WOW you are an interesting individual. Have you ever bought a gun outside of a gun show? They aren't that expensive, and the background check was a breeze, and it doesn't violate your privacy at all. You subject yourself to background checks all the time, have you ever gotten a JOB?

Also, Class warefare? What in the sam **** are you talking about? This has nothing to do with class, if you want a gun you can save up and buy one. We aren't talking about a car, or a house FFS. The only costs that would feasibly go up are the ones at gun shows where they sell cheap firearms to any person who walks in, no questions asked. You know.. THE PROBLEM BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE TRYING TO FIX.

Very few people have any even remote idea on how to get some black market gun. It's not like you just go to whatever shady alley you live near and there's guy with a trenchcoat full of firearms. Yeah, it CAN be done, but do you really think the average 'murican imbecile who commits these kinds of acts has even the slightest inkling on how to get one? Most of them aren't going to be able to make that connection. Some will, god OF COURSE, but as I keep telling people THAT'S NOT THE ****ING POINT.

You don't read the headline "Background Check Prevents Shooting!" Because if it prevented a shooting, IT WOULDN'T BE A STORY YOU NUMB-SKULL!!! Because nothing would have happened!

And the only decrease in gun ownership that would occur is people who can't pass a background check. People that have no business owning a deadly weapon in the first place. WHICH, I will add, the concept of a decrease in ownership is a direct contradiction to your notion that if you can't get it at a gun-show, you will just buy it elsewhere.

Lastly, if you want to talk about the second amendment fine. Yes, we have a right to bear firearms, but the bill of rights didn't take 2 things into account because it's over 200 ****ing years old. Do you know what gun technology was like back then!? Have you ever tried to load a flint-lock rifle, or a musket!? That hardly posed much threat to many people. If the village idiot back then went berserk we wouldn't have giant massacres, we'd have one death and the townsfolk would hang him on the spot.

Modern weaponry needs to be addressed in a new light, when the village idiot (as we now see regularly) buys some high-powered rifle and unloads on a crowd, he's killing a dozen people before he's caught, injuring just as many in the process. There's still no reason to change the amendment what-so-ever. We have a RIGHT to bear arms. When you are a psychopath though, just like when you are convicted of a felony, your rights (when involving the safety of others) are subject to re-evaluation. This has no affect on non-crazy, non-violent individuals. When you are criminally insane, or have committed acts of violence with a deadly weapon in the past, you shouldn't be owning a gun. At that point you've proven you are not a responsible or intelligent person, and are a danger to society at that point.

I would assume from your nonsensical ramblings that you yourself wouldn't pass a background check, which is why this bothers you so much. Especially since EVERY. SINGLE. OTHER. POINT. you have tried to bring up is absolutely false or horribly ignorant of the world around you.

With all that in mind, background checks will prevent SOME deaths, and seeing as how it does NOT infringe on anyone's rights because as long as you aren't some crazy/violent **** you can still get one, if it stops even ONE shooting, there's no reason NOT to implement it.

But you know what, keep throwing out your nonsense rhetoric about how it harms poor people, and creates class warfare, and makes it impossible for anyone to purchase something as affordable as a gun from anywhere but ****ing gun shows. You have been a prime example of 'Murican idiocy, so thank you for making it so easy to point out to anyone with a brain reading this conversation as to where the problem is in this process.

Because, god forbid, we stop EVEN ONE crazy SOB from buying a high powered assault rifle. Especially when it doesn't hurt anyone in the process.

@skyhighgam3r: Try 4th 5th 10th Amendment rights. The 2nd amendment or more accurately the intent as put forth by our founders as seen in the Federalist Papers was to give the average citizen the ability to fight back against a tyrannical government. The Bill of Rights was put in place to essentially tell government what rights are sacrosanct and not to be messed with. Something oft not taught to kids in school nowadays. Why continue to waste money on something that according to numbers published by the FBI (the agency that handles Background Checks via National Criminal Instant Check) has a 0.007% success rate of actually stopping illegal purchase and even has a higher false positive rate then legit hits? We've for going on 20 years dumped billions if not trillions of dollars into this system and it does little to nothing to stop violent crime.