What's the difference between an index finger moving rapidly back & forth at a grand total of 1/2" compared to keeping it pulled back? To me, the end result isn't much after weighing the consequences.
Poorer muzzle control is a valid argument. Disastrous results are aplenty. But let's look at the big picture. There are already full auto owners. The only major difference between Joe Schmoe like me and a full auto owner is 3-4 months of patience and a few hundred less in their bank account. Laws of probability come in play, you say? The more owners there are the greater the chance of something negative happening due to a full auto weapon? Ok, sure. You can argue that point.
Here are some items to consider on that law of probability. If there's an actual incident involving a full auto that ends up being bad news, I'm betting on it being few and far between. Look at the number of former military personnel with experience handling a full auto. Look at the possible demographics of individuals that will be serious enough to actually want a full auto. How many that might be irresponsible with a full auto will actually want one?
There's so many variables involved it's hard to put it on paper to prove or disprove if full auto weapons are warranted.
That's why I rely on some really smart men with sound forethought when the 2nd Amendment was written. My personal belief is there should be absolutely NO restrictions on a law abiding person to own a weapon they can keep and bear. Period.