You're right; the sentence in question adheres to grammatical convention sufficiently to be legible. It is, however, incredibly absurd to say that the Founding Fathers would have opposed background checks because they go against the presumption of innocence in criminal affairs.
You do tone argument a lot, and you do it rather well, but it's a rather silly approach when it's all you ever do. And it's rapidly approaching all you ever do in your replies to me.
~Camilla
Ghavrel is Ghavrel is Ghavrel
*MySmiley*