Lest we forget the broad proscription in the Second Amendment stating that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and the fact that if politicians and special interest groups would LIKE to infringe on the right to keep and bear arms, they can try to AMEND the Constitution, there is news that the NRA has struck a deal with Democrats in Washington on... background checks.

See what you think, and then consider that if someone does not want his background checked, even these seemingly innocuous and protective "background checks" are, strictly speaking, an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms. On balance, did the NRA do good or ill here? And why can't people be honest and actually try to amend the Constitution if they want to impose these supposedly salutory measures?

Here is the story, from the Washington Post:
_____

Democrats, NRA Reach Deal on Background-Check Bill

By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 10, 2007; Page A02

Senior Democrats have reached agreement with the National Rifle Association on what could be the first federal gun-control legislation since 1994, a measure to significantly strengthen the national system that checks the backgrounds of gun buyers.

The sensitive talks began in April, days after a mentally ill gunman killed 32 students and teachers at Virginia Tech University. The shooter, Seung Hui Cho, had been judicially ordered to submit to a psychiatric evaluation, which should have disqualified him from buying handguns. But the state of Virginia never forwarded that information to the federal National Instant Check System (NICS), and the massacre exposed a loophole in the 13-year-old background-check program.

Under the agreement, participating states would be given monetary enticements for the first time to keep the federal background database up to date, as well as penalties for failing to comply.

MORE:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR200706...