In response to:

Graham: Background-Check Bill ‘Going Nowhere’

wmessinger Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 8:49 AM
Why should a Citizen - who has been convicted of a crime and served his sentence - be banned from possessing a firearm for the rest of his life? We don't deny driver's licenses for repeat DWI convictions. Only for firearms, even if the crime was unrelated to guns. The background check is nothing more than BLACKBALLING - another form of baseless discrimination.
MudontheTires Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 10:16 PM
"Why should a Citizen - who has been convicted of a crime and served his sentence - be banned from possessing a firearm for the rest of his life?"

They can petition the courts to have their rights restored. Your argument is a strawman.
bigdog_137 Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 9:21 AM
should convicted criminals be banned from firearms possession? Yes. Fool.
Unknown3rdParty Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 6:41 PM
There's a world of difference between the convict who did hard time for murder while committing armed robbery and a treasurer involved in white-collar embezzlement. There's a non-violent felony offense ... I think after a suitable time frame--possibly several years--and depending on the dollar amount embezzled, they should be able to petition to regain that right.
bigdog_137 Wrote: Apr 01, 2013 7:22 PM
Never. Not ever. Period. No. No.No.

Sen. Lindsey Graham blasted Democratic efforts to pass new gun-control bills on CNN’s State of the Union Sunday—particularly legislation that expands background checks.

“The current system is broken,” he said. “Why in the world would you expand that system if you’re not enforcing the law that exists today to include private transfers? So I think that legislation is going nowhere, but I’d like to have a robust debate about improving the system.”

As an example of how the system is broken, Graham explained, "There are 76,000 people last year who that failed a background check and less than...