Background Checks: The Hot Subject of Todays Gun Control Hearing

Figures on both sides of the gun control debate tangled today over the effectiveness of background checks, with the husband of wounded former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords urging an overhaul and a top National Rifle Association official saying “homicidal maniacs” will skirt the system no matter what.
NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre was the final witness to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee as the panel begins to consider new legislation. He argued that more security and more enforcement, but not new laws, is the answer to gun violence. 
He specifically knocked down a call by President Obama and others for “universal” background checks, particularly at gun shows.
“When it comes to background checks, let’s be honest — background checks will never be universal because criminals will never submit to them,” LaPierre said. 

But Giffords’ husband Mark Kelly argued that improving the background check system should be a priority. He said holes in the law “make a mockery” of the system — echoing Obama’s recent proposal, he called for submitting private sales to background checks as well. He further argued that stronger background checks could have prevented the mass shooting in January 2011 where his wife was shot in the head. 

LaPierre later got into an argument over the issue with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., after LaPierre argued that more background checks would merely subject “law-abiding people” to more taxes and fees and hassle without going after “bad guys.”

The disagreement was one of several sticking points as the Senate Judiciary Committee held the first gun control hearing since Obama released a comprehensive gun control plan earlier this month.

Read more at Fox News

Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • Kioga

    Gifford’s husband, Mark, is still with Military, right ? How about his oath as an Officer to defend the Constitution, or does his involvement here constitute a conflict of interest that should be addressed ?

    • Don August

      He is no longer in the military, but the oath he took does not stop upon separation. I left the military in 1967 and I will still honor the oath I took!

    • Rattlerjake

      Realize he was an astronaut? They also send monkeys into space! Now you know the extent of his intelligence.

  • Sam_from_Houston

    How about Universal Background checks right after we have one for the current resident of 1600 Penn and “universal ID checks” before voting.

    • Rattlerjake

      Our government is like the dog walking the man. These people wouldn’t know common sense if you painted it on a brick and beat them with it. I had to show an ID to get on base and at the commissary today, yet they refuse to force proof of ID to vote. They want to subject law abiding citizens to background checks, yet criminals do not buy weapons at shows or businesses, they steal them or buy them from black market sources. Until they establish a way to identify mental illness on a persons background, background checks are useless. How about executing anyone convicted of murder, aggravated rape, pedophilia, and those with severe mental disorders that make them a danger to society – it would quickly eliminate all of these insane democrats that insist on killing, harming, and controlling defenseless people.

  • foxxybey

    Back ground checks are good but, they can’t tell if the person is evil or not, so it really doesn’t work all that good. I know many who can pass a background check who are so evil they shouldn’t own any kind of weapon, so until you can weed out the evil with the crooks it won’t work.

  • Sagebrush6

    How about background checks on all of our politicians ? This would scare the hell aout of most of them. Like did you know Feinstein carries?

  • Spyderdalton

    We need a background check on Obama. They want to know all the information on who we are yet all of Obama’s records remained sealed and he runs the country? What a joke!

  • Dr. Evil

    Could have, maybe, if…. probably not. There is not requirement to report crazy people.

  • donniebuchanan

    ONLY when Obama is thoroughly investigated will he be able to ask for the investigation of others. After all,. he controls more guns than any American that ever lived. However, all of this is pointless. Check out Mexico, it has a total ban on guns but criminals still have them. If outlawing guns gets them off of the streets, lets outlaw heroin and cocaine….get the point?

  • Attila

    Careful. Who does a background check serve? It places you on a government database much the same as a formal registration. When the tyrant decides, they will come and take your gun.
    The arguments for these checks is specious. The people who should not have guns (criminals, nut cases) should be locked up. The only restriction should be no mail order guns to prisons.

  • marineh2ominer

    The very FIRST background check that needs run Is that of Barak Hussein Obamass , as he has the deadliest weapons of all , nuclear weapons at his command .