Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh
Why should I not be permitted the use of an automatic weapon to defend my home?

I am responsible for that weapon's proper storage, safe use, and injuries infliceted thereby -- as I would and should be with any other weapon -- so what is the problem?

If I use a baseball bat to crush the skull of an intruder, a kitchen knife to puncture the intruder's lung, or a burst from an M-60 to take that intruder out, what is the difference?

Does possession of an automatic weapon somehow decerebrate the individual, forcing them to become a crazed killer who simply has to take the gun out for a stroll and hose down a school bus on full rock and roll?

Does the prohibition of such weapons somehow prevent, in practice, the whack-job who would commit such a horror from acquiring such a weapon?

We live in a world where you can acquire weapons of mass destruction with a trip to your local feed & seed store and a stop at Radio Shack. Zip home, download the instructions from the net and make your kill. Crazies don't run off to become hermits anymore -- they go for the media splash.

Since that is the world in which we live, I don't think gun control laws accomplish what they set out to do.

Perhaps we should go the other direction: a legal requirement for all non-felons who are physically/mentally able to own, be trained to use, and carry a firearm. I bet social politeness would be "in" real quick. Perhaps not?
The question is not why should you be allowed or not allowed to own a fully automatic weapon. But what was the intent of the drafter's of the constitution? Did they intend the people to have access to every possible type of weapon, or as men of their time did the intend the people to have the ability to rightfully defend themselves with personal arms.

Think back to the 1994 Assualt weapon's ban, Why did congress place an automatic expiration date into that piece of the legislation? Was it because - unlike the Machine gun ban of 1934 - they knew that the legislation would not stand up to judicial review? Then there is the Miller case where the court also ruled in favor of government restriction on weapons.