Give you a break?
You're still crying moral outrage about something that happened years ago - and had a satisfactory conclusion (closing a loophole which could allow criminals to acquire guns with which to commit "real crimes").
In a thread you started on "faux moral outrage" - that's quite hilarious.
I think you are having a comprehension failure. I responded to someone else, with a single comment that was then picked up on and argued by others including you. I am not crying about it, I am stating I felt she got off without a punishment I felt should have been harsher. Just because it happened years ago, doesn't make it right.
She *actually* committed a crime, unlike the examples I gave where people had misunderstood a simple comment and railed about it for days.
If you're argument is "means justify the end" then I am seriously lost for words.