[Metal god]

Maybe you raimius or one of the other lawyers can chime in here . If the NFA or other fully auto restrictions have never been heard at the SCOTUS . I ask why ? I find it hard to believe nobody has challenged those laws yet or has the high court just chose not to grant cert any time they've come up ?

It's another entirely to devise devices to defeat the purpose of existing laws,

I'm conflicted as to if I agree or not . Here in CA we adopted the bullet button which is a device that turns your detachable magazine into a fixed magazine that needs a tool in order to release the mag . That tool can be anything pointy and a bullet is often used and where it got it's name .

The bullet button was solely invented to get around CA AW laws that banned guns with detachable magazines that also had any one of the following , pistol grip , flash hider , forward grip and a couple other things I believe . How ever once you put a bullet button on your rifle it was considered a long gun with a "fixed" magazine allowing you to have all those other goodies on your rifle .

I did not support the banning of those cosmetic feature and was more then happy to support the bullet button work around and was happy to have them on all my rifles .

There in lies my conflict . I had no problem with circumventing that law but don't really support the circumventing of the full auto law . Although as I explained in an earlier post . The slide fire stock does not actually circumventing the NFA because the shooter and only the shooter controls the rate of fire . That actually legally makes it no different then pulling the trigger as fast or slow as you can . The shooter is the only thing manipulating the rifle and it's rate of fire .

I don't know , as I stated I'm a little conflicted on this issue and writing about has helped me work out my thoughts a bit but it may take me a little while longer to fully come to a conclusion as to where my heart really is on this .