I will agree with two of your statements made in your (Dec. 3 editorial). Yes, no one likes to wait in line to get a drivers license and the Brady Bill has not stopped criminals from buying guns. It has always been illegal for criminals and unbalanced individuals to buy guns.
The issue here is not the wait while a background check is conducted. The point is 8.7 million law-abiding Americans were forced to prove themselves eligible to exercise their constitutional rights.
Drawing on the comparison made between motorists and gun buyers, a person doesn't have to prove they have a valid license to buy a car. A motorist doesn't have to pass an MVD check to retrieve his automobile from a repair shop. A person convicted of driving on a suspended license is not subject to having his automobile impounded.
Correct me if I am wrong, but when a license is suspended, it is usually for reasons of unsafe behavior on the roadway. You point out that the Brady Bill (may) prevent individuals from buying guns in fits of anger, but no one is denying the individual convicted of road rage to keep and bear an automobile or to pass an MVD check before buying one.
Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating criminals with guns. I'm merely saying the 8.7 million Americans that purchased guns should not have had to prove their innocence before exercising their Second Amendment rights to keep and bear arms.
By your own admission, the law has not stopped criminals from buying guns. It has, however, negated the innocent until proven policy that our justice system is based upon.
Mike McLaughlin, Payson