Quote:
|
Originally Posted by USAFNoDak
No, what I've been saying all along is that laws such as the NFA are dangerous to our civil rights because they can be used as tools by the anti's to further regulate other types of guns.
|
I understand your point and as I stated before it is part of the slippery slope fallacy to wit:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tennessee Gentleman
Political momentum: Once the government has passed this gun law it becomes easier to pass other gun laws, including laws like confiscation.
|
It does not follow.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by USAFNoDak
They need more justification.
|
Which they find (as pointed out by 44 AMP above) by the
crimes committed with those guns by drug gangs and insane mass shooters that worry the public. THAT is what drives them NOT the NFA or FOPA '86.
Also, the Hughes Amendment was just a poison pill for the FOPA which contained a whole bunch of stuff (like FFLs being able to do gunshows) which the antis did not want. I don't think the antis really cared about FA other than they want them along with everything else banned and it certainly had no bearing on the NFA.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by USAFNoDak
So, I do note the differences between SA and FA, but with respect to SA "assault weapons" specifically, and their FA counterparts, there is not much difference other than multiple rounds per trigger pull vs. one round only per trigger pull.
|
Which we have disagreed on before but that is a different argument.
