I don't want to confiscate anything.....you obviously know firearms and I look at some of the cheap crap out there like I would an unsafe car....that is all.....and yes, if you want to pigeonhole be because of fully automatic weapons than so be it.....I know anyone who knows much about firearms can file down or make a semi into a full auto fairly easily.....I don't think people should own anti tank guns or 50 caliber machine guns etc......yes there is a line to be drawn but it is drawn and has to be somewhere. I don't think even the NRA is angling to get .50 caliber machine guns back into use.....I"m not talking about the 50 caliber bolt or semi's ......that is all I really want to discuss this.....i'm having too much fun on my other threads.....I understand what you are saying and that is fine......to turn me into a liberal or something really is a stretch.....just that my line is drawn perhaps different than yours but we probably agree on 95% of this........would be a shame to keep arguing over 5% don't ya think?
As usual, it always comes down to whose 5% gets sacrificed.
The Second Amendment allows for no infringement. The amendment process of the Constitution is available to make adjustments so that full-auto firearms could be restricted. The requirement to make such a change is more than just a majority vote of Congress and there is a very good reason for such protections of fundamental human rights.
What you claim is 5% is for me, in fact, at least 33% since I have had to relocate five of the fifteen firearms I own to storage 3000 miles from my home.
Would you be willing to allow a majority of Congress, with the consent of the President, to eliminate the requirement for trial by jury? How about just eliminating the requirement of trial by jury for 5% of defendants? How about eliminating 5% of the requirements for search warrants. How about shutting down 5% of freedom of the press?