Politics aside, do you agree with Clinton's suggestion, recommending stricter background checks for those wanting to purchase weapons?

I do not feel that any form of gun control no matter how it is papered over will or could work other than to control law abiding folks. As many have stated the crooks, nutt jobs, whackos and corn-balls will always find a way to get their hands on a gun or guns if necessary. They are not opposed to using other forms of deadly weapons or force to carry out their maniacal schemes and you can't outlaw every little thing. Gun control is a pablum provided the masses by liberals who pander for votes in every way possible and are behind all the government controls, good and bad, foisted on US today.

If you really want an honest response from people, you should just ask if people support expanded background checks, and not evoke Hillary Clinton into the question.

Yes...
I think The Back ground Check should be done and to those who qualify and are not Criminals should be allowed to acquire the weapons...
the Reason... Take out the Wild cards
the problem... its away to go overboard and manipulate the process and laws so they can Control "who ...what ...and where ", the weapons go for easy confiscation...

hypothetically speaking... do we need more strict background checks for gun purchases or for refugees?

Yes it's only common sense in my opinion!

If tightening background checks limits our Constitutional rights, do Viter ID laws tightening up who can vote limit Constitutional rights? What about restricting Muslims or people from certain countries - does that tightening restrict Constitutional rights as well?

This isn't really a point about the 2nd Amendment as in the post, more just food for thought... Is modern-day interpretations creating tighter restrictions on things limit the Constitution or advance and evolve those ideals to fit modern-day beliefs. Most likely a good answer lies somewhere on a case by case basis.

The government can't take my guns, but I am not sold one way or another on background checks. Half of me sees it as a baby step toward massive restrictions, half of me sees it as a logical move to protect citizens from those who aren't responsible (or worse are a threat).

I tend to go with the goals of the Constitution, but it seems these days that modernization of certain clauses may be a good thing but they could also be detrimental to the core principles... Case by case I guess

No ! Why you may ask, because if you can't ask a person for their I.D. to vote. And you can't vet a Muslim when they enter this country, without being labeled a Islamophobia nut, then why should an undue burden be placed on our own citizens, when they decide to purchase a weapon for self preservation? These are not separate issues, the principal is the same , if you place a stricter burden on someone who purchases a gun, but allow some Raghead easy access into our country with only a cursory background check. Then find out they come from a hornets nest of Terrorist. No way let's leave the average Joe American citizen alone, and start weeding out these Islamic Dick weeds that I fought against back in the 80's out of the country. And we did it without smart bombs, infrared devices, portable computers and very little satellite and definitely no Drone support. And we successfully kept these idiots off of U.S. soil. Now we have all this tech, and they move here by the thousands. What happened?