Thanks for the serious input. Now that I know what this gun is, and it's not an anti-aircraft gun that someone in the Bush campaign office told me, I will oppose adding additional restrictions of the .50 cal BMG rifles to private citizens.
I asked a simple question. I needed a simple answer. I thank those of you who gave me the answer. I would rather make an informed decision then answer a question of which I know nothing about.
You know, people get touchy about guns around here.
Don't go wobbly on us, HLL!
The important thing to realize about .50's is that they are just the largest generally available gun out there right now. If they are banned, then there will be another calibre that becomes the largest, and the anti-gunners will start taking out after that.
It may be that slippery slope arguments are often silly, but I think they are entirely appropriate in this case. Government has an inherent interest in limiting private ownership of weaponry. There is really no lower limit to the size and type of weapon the government would have an interest in limiting private owership of.
That is why the "Second Amendment Absolutist" position makes sense to me...
People here are very defensive when the terms "gun" and "practical" are used together. Many people have many things that are not practical, like private jets. However, if they can afford them great!.
Target shooting these weapons is like riding bulls. People do it, but it ain't for everybody. If you do like it then it is like nothing else. Personally I prefer a smaller caliber in full-auto, but I still like shooting El Roy's Barrett.