I do agree with Skyviking that we need to quit shooting ourselves in the foot, but I (certainly in the minority here) do understand why the NFA and the Gun Control Act of 1968 were passed and I think it's important to remember that neither had anything to do with pissing off law abiding gun owners.
The NFA was passed in response to the general lawlessness of the gangster era. You had gangster's, in some cases armed with fully automatic weapons, in other cases with sawed off shotguns, in very many cases the individuals were already convicted felons...shooting up each other, LEO's and generally making a mess of things. So, people asked for help and politicians passed the NFA. I'm not saying it helped or hurt or was a good idea....I'm saying that's why it happened. It wasn't that the congress woke up one morning and said...."The second amendment scares us...let's go take it away'.
Same thing happened in 1968 during LBJ's 9-month lame duck period between when he went on TV and said "I will not seek my party's nomination to be reelected and will not accept the nomination if chosen." and when his term ended. He, and congress, were responding to demands that they do something (anything) after the assassinations of JFK, MLK, and Robert Kennedy. All killed by guns. So they did something. Was it good? Was it bad? Was it needed? Did it help? Debatable at every question, but again the impetus was never to jack the second, it was because the people wanted government to do something.
Bump stocks weren't an issue until the mass shooting in Vegas.
So, I am in the small minority of gun owners that believe in the entire bill of rights but also believe that certain restrictions to gun ownership make sense. For instance prohibitions to violent felons owning guns. Mag restrictions? Makes no sense to me. SBR restrictions? I don't know...probably horseshit. Restrictions on people with mental problems owning firearms? That makes sense to me. Background checks at gunshows? Yup. That makes sense.
When we (or the NRA) takes ever step to push back on every possible rule, some of which 75 to 80% of the public agree with...we are shooting ourselves in the foot in my opinion.
I understand that a lot of you will disagree with me and I respect your opinions greatly. This is just how I see it. I"m not asinine enough to think my ideas and opinons matter anymore than anyone else's do though.
Oh....and thing I do take issue with is politicians or groups ginning up outrage just as a method to increase donations to their cause. Whether it's those ASPCA ads showing injured puppies in cages or the NRA trying to make villains out of everyone on the other side....it just totally turns me off.
law·break·er | \ ˈlȯ-ˌbrā-kər \
Definition of lawbreaker
: a person who violates the law
So, your theory is that we take Constitutionally protected Rights from honest Citizens, by passing Laws that only the honest Citizen will follow. That is the equivalent of putting the patch on the three good tires, because the bad tire leaks air. SMH