I've only read up to page 35 of this thread, so maybe something has been said along these lines already... What 10Gagenut said above is exactly the example I have used before to people....do we "need" cars that can go faster than 70MPH ? Do we "need" lifted trucks with 36" tires ? Do we "need" a semi-auto shotgun to hunt ducks ? Do we "need" extended tubes to hold 12 rounds to hunt Spring snow geese ? To BuckMaster: Sure we can look like "whackos" when we dont want to budge, but where do we draw the line ? When people like Nancy Pelosi state that certain firearms should be banned due to their intimidating look, that we dont "need" them to hunt with and have no other facts or sound reasons to back these claims (the only reason to ban these is because they "look" evil), this is what worries me and makes me a little more "far right" than what I normally would be. I dont think I'd mind banning bump-stocks, but part of me says "give em an inch and they'll take a mile". Giving them a "feel good" reason, in my opinion, will only lead to more " feel goods " tomorrow, and the next day, and the next, and the......Its ALWAYS "just one more law would've prevented this".