My answer. So what? You are not required to conduct a background investigation since there is no prohibited class of people to preclude the sale. Are you suggesting car deals should require a background check?
What about the guy who has lost his license and has been caught DWI a number of times? Isn't he a prohibited class of person as it relates to driving a car?
There has never been any statistic what-so-ever that proves background checks have reduced gun crimes or have ultimately stopped any violent, prohibited, person, from getting a firearm. For one thing, a private sale of handguns can not 'legally" take place if the seller and the buyer are not residents of the same state. This is the case for gun shows as well. Secondly, a private sale to a felon is a federal felony by itself. Thus, the seller, if he is law abiding, better know who the heck he is selling to, even at a gun show.
Background checks do not stop straw purchases or illegal purchases from shady, yet licensed, dealers. How will straw purchases be stopped? A straw purchase is also a felony. That doesn't seem to stop them.
There seems to be a pattern amongst gun controllers, even though some of them own and use guns. Their philosophy seems to be, if that last gun control law didn't work and meet its objective of lowering violent crimes, let's add another layer. But a house built on a crappy foundation will soon fall apart, and won't be worth much in the end.
Do I think background checks should be eliminated? Not necessarily, if they stay instantaneous. But after 10 or 20 years, when it can still not be demonstrated that they have done any good in lowering violent crime rates (which they haven't and won't), we should re visit it. Anything that makes gun ownership more of a hassle for honest gun owners, without reducing violent crime, should be abolished, in my opinion.