I certainly don't want to start THIS argument again....

But watch what you say.
I quote the MA
"I can see no legitimate reason for owning an assault weapon. In trained hands, a semi-automatic is as useful (if not more so) for home defense."
"assult weapons" are semi automatic or at least, the ones that 99.9999% of the ones that owned buy your average American Gun owner. Fully AUtomatic guns are heavily regulated by the government and require additional background checks by local, state, and FBI, fingerprinting, and punitive taxes (which takes a minimum of 3 months to complete.
A semi auto is a semi auto mechanically speaking. Give it a bayonette lug and a folding stock and it now becomes an evil "assult weapon" that must be banned.
That is why there has been so much troubles (and loopholes) with things like the Brady Law. They determined Assult weapons by physical appearance, so the Gun folks took the bayonett lug off, took off flash surpressor, gave it a hunting style stock and a 10 round magazine and *poof* it was OK.
Same gun, different clothing.
So if you are going to Ban them... then you have to ban them all and that won't happen. Duck hunters use semi-auto shotguns, Olympic teams shoot with semi-auto rifles, target shooters.... etc etc.

The main thing is, if we want to keep the "right" that we have, we all have to stick together. That means the guy that shoots deer from his back porch to protect his blackberry patch has to stick up for and help out the guy who collects WW2 machine guns (even though he does not shoot them much).

On another note.

If cattle guys take the nuts off a bull, do they then give them hormone shots? If so, why take the nuts off in the first place if you have a small herd and are going to butcher them in a year anyway?

Back to the Trenches