Brady Bill and Background Checks

[hortysir]

The year was 1981.
James Brady and President Reagan were shot by Hinkley.

As a result, though 12 years later, we have what we know as "the Brady Bill".
Signed into law by Clinton in 1993.

Now, in 93, the Democratic party had control of the House, the Senate and the office of President so they had free range to make the Brady Bill as biting as possible.
They did.

Even though the SCOTUS determined that background checks were unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment, we still have them today and our current members of the Democratic party want even more extensive background checks.


Democratic Party,
What is so wrong with your own Brady Bill that it is inadequate to the extent that you feel obliged to pass even more restrictive gun laws?

 

[Wyatt earp]

What? the Supremes ruled what was unconstitutional with the brady law, was forcing local sheriffs to perform back ground checks funded or not, not the entire bill itself.

 

[hortysir]

What? the Supremes ruled what was unconstitutional with the brady law, was forcing local sheriffs to perform back ground checks funded or not, not the entire bill itself.

Yet many LEOs still do it, was my point.

Care to answer the question?