You absolutely wrong. Gun manufacturers are only affected by the primary market. All sales in the primary market are subject to background checks now. I am not going to quote percentages because there is no way to know, but the vast majority of criminals get their guns on the black market which will never be subject to background checks. The people that do these horrible acts are not criminals before the acts. They are wackos that go off the deep end.So what would be the original point on entry for a weapon provide to Family, Friends or those traded at gun shows other than the Gun Manufactuers in America for of course a profit?
Any legislation to enhance background checks is an opportunity to shrink the market which cuts into Manufactuers profits, and the til to pay Politicians to work in their favor when it comes to legislation.
Like everything else in America politicians loyalty has it's cost. There are only two groups of people tightening of Background checks affect Gun Manufactuers and Criminals.
Most laws, and this proposed bill is one, contain provisions for regulations and other variables to be decided after the bill by the AG's office. This bill contains a clause where the maximum fee an FFL can charge to do a transfer. Who is to say that won't be so high in the future that it is cost prohibitive to transfer a gun. That was the purpose of the Federal Firearms Act back in the 30's, where a $200 tax was imposed on any transfer of a class 3 weapon. In the thirties, you could buy a new Ford for $600.
As far as the Senator lying to the mom, supporting an idea, and voting for a bill are not equal. I would support a background check, if the check was performed by law enforcement free of charge. But if it required proving legal ownership of the gun, I would be against it. I would support checking the stolen gun database, but proving you are the legal owner of a gun you bought 40 years ago, is like an ex post facto law.