Need doesn't have anything to do with it.
There should be no regulations on small arms at all in this country.
The cost issue would go away if there were no regulations.
Need has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Unless you're military or LE you don't need full auto weapons.
So why do we "need" any weapons at all?
After all, we have the police to protect us, right?
And the judicial system never fails us, right?
And why do police need FA weapons?
Perhaps they work better for solving certain situations, like putting some guy on PCP on his ass.
Don't I deserve the same ability to respond to a threat as a police officer?
If you want to get technical about it, the military doesn't need Full-auto either. Rapid aimed fire is almost always more accurate.
But, since we have now entered the age of peace on earth, maybe we should arm our servicemen with stun guns and pepper spray...
Why do they need guns after all?
I mean, guns are so dangerous...
Why can't we all just get along?
To date, the only guns that I own that have been used to kill anyone are the old Mil-Surps, and that was 50 years ago. None of the AK's that I have owned have been used to harm anyone, nor have their Hi-Cap mags.
That trend would continue if I had a Full-auto.
The type of gun, the law, the Brady bill...none of them have anything to do with controlling my behavior.
Anyone with ten minutes of spare time, internet access and a hardware store nearby can build a bomb and hurt alot of people, IF they were so inclined.
But you will note that none of us have done that.
Why?
Because we don't want to hurt people.
Laws are nice, but at the end of the day, I am the reason that I don't hurt people.
BTW-I read somewhere that Thompson SMG's were used by farmers to kill prarie dogs before the NFA.