Repeal the Hugh's amendment and the NFA

There has yet to be any evidence provided that justifies the continued prohibition on the ownership of modern machine guns, and why they cannot be made available to the general public. The currently registered ones are not being used in the commission of crimes, so why should new ones not be made available for purchase and ownership as well? What is the rational justification, when there is no similar prohibition on the manufacture and ownership of short barreled shotguns and rifles?

 

Machine gun crime is very rare nowadays. You don't hear about crimes like the Saint Valentine's massacre anymore. So let's not fix something that isn't broke.

 

You've just proven that the Hughes Amendment wasn't necessary.

 

Even before the ban such massacres were rare. And the NFA restricts more than machine guns. Tell me why we should keep short barreled rifles and shotguns on the list.

 

Crimes committed with machine guns were rare even prior to the national firearms act being enacted into law. The amendment in question, however, is unrelated to those restrictions. Rather than addressing the regulations in place with the national firearms act, this particular amendment simply prevents any firearms manufactured after a specific date being made available for private ownership. Pray tell why was this necessary? Why should this prohibition not be eliminated entirely, thus allowing for the ownership of new machine guns to be made possible once more? They will still be registered and taxed by the ATF, so what is the legitimate, meaningful point in keeping the maximum number at less than one million?

 

Horsepoo.
Your statement:
It's good that you recognize that a strictly regulated type of gun is rarely used in crime.

Your implied argument related to same:
Strict regulation leans to rate criminal use.

Thus, your post hoc fallacy, illustrated in full.

Unless, of course, your intend for your statement,noted above, to have some other meaning.
If so, feel free to share.

The "broken" part here is an unjustified and unnecessary restriction on the right to keeps and bear arms -- removing said restriction "fixes" this.

 

Tell us about Sandyhook, Aurora and Orlando, and then tell us why your statement remains relevant.

 

easily done. the latter three crimes were not committed with full auto, and could have been FAR more deadly with poison or pipe bombs.