I tried to find the article that is in todays paper, however, it doesn't seem to be online yet, so I posted this one, just for reference.
Perhaps I missed it in all of the articles that I've read on this matter, or perhaps the reason was never mentioned, but I'm curious...what is the big deal about the background checks? Now, as I've said before, I'm not anti-gun, however, if it means expanding the checks a bit more, to potentially avoid someone getting access to a gun, that shouldn't, well, wouldn't it make sense to expand the checks?
Of course, something else that I may've missed is...what exactly does the 'expanded background check' consist of? Are the people who're against this, thinking that this expansion may infringe in some rights?
President Barack Obama on Wednesday will formally announce the most aggressive and expansive national gun-control agenda in generations as he presses Congress to mandate background checks for all firearm buyers and prohibit assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips.The announcement will set off a fierce confrontation with Congress over an issue that has riven American society for decades. Obama's far-reaching firearms agenda has at best tepid support from his party leaders and puts him at odds with Democratic centrists.
Perhaps I missed it in all of the articles that I've read on this matter, or perhaps the reason was never mentioned, but I'm curious...what is the big deal about the background checks? Now, as I've said before, I'm not anti-gun, however, if it means expanding the checks a bit more, to potentially avoid someone getting access to a gun, that shouldn't, well, wouldn't it make sense to expand the checks?
Of course, something else that I may've missed is...what exactly does the 'expanded background check' consist of? Are the people who're against this, thinking that this expansion may infringe in some rights?