Comment: I'd say Mr. Grassley and Mr.

(See in situ)

I'd say Mr. Grassley and Mr.

I'd say Mr. Grassley and Mr. Leibowitz are both directing the discussion away from the actual issue, which is: Is it appropriate for the state to violate the privacy of good people who want to arm themselves?

If you have your fight regarding the question of whether background checks work, you've already given away your key position, which is your right to not have your background checked when you make the decision to protect your family in a certain way.

The rest is just a cute logic trick, whose reasoning is provably unsound. Background checks are screening to prevent gun crime. The issue is prior restraint, the assumption of criminality....The equivalent with regard to "laws against stealing" would be background-checking all people who attempt to buy or sell anything, in order to make sure all economic actors are decent people.