Y'all are going a little fast for me, let me see if I can catch up....
Prove it. I could certainly ensure with reasonable, responsible accuracy that I will not endanger innocent bystanders with a select-fire weapon.
So, what are you saying? That you would do the RESPONSIBLE thing and put the selector switch on semi-auto in order not to endanger others? If you are suggesting that you would use a fully automatic firearm in a crowded store, then that's just plain IRRESPONSIBLE!
How would it be negligent? Have you ever patterned a shotgun? Disregarding the fact that I wouldn't likely be carrying a full length shotgun in a crowded store, if for some reason I was, and there was an assailant there, I would not hesitate to use it if the assailant was within any distance that I would consider a prudent shot with a handgun.
I wasn't suggesting that the target is so close that every pellet would be sure to hit him, are YOU seriously suggesting that at a distance of 15-20 feet, (a reasonable pistol shot), in a crowded store that you would use a shotgun? Again, that's just plain IRRESPONSIBLE!
The entire span of recorded human history would disagree with you.
If we were talking history here, I would agree with you.
Joe, did the US get trashed in Vietnam?
We were defeated by POLITICS! There was NEVER any question that we could have won that war militarily. So, that's not a good example to use to prove that lesser arms can defeat better arms.
Joe, do you think that Marine living across your street, who swore an oath to the Constitution, not the commander in chief, is going to help his government suppress the people?
Maybe he might not, but, unfortunately, I think there ARE military and police officers, who WOULD "suppress the people" at the bidding of the government. Just look at New Orleans for the example.
Do you think our 250,000 man army can realistically take on 90 million armed citizens?
I think this is an unrealistic question. 1.) There aren't 90 million gun owners in America and not every gun owner would be willing to revolt. 2.) The military would probably NOT participate in any forced suppression of the American people, (at least not enough of them to be able to do it).
So, you would rather have our current freeze on new machine guns for civilians and the 8 states that don't allow them crap, as compared to the Swiss system?
No, actually, I WOULD prefer the Swiss system. But, it's NOT going to happen here, so I'm not going to get all bent out of shape whining about it not happening. Instead, I'm going to work to try to keep things from getting WORSE than they are NOW!