8 arrested in North Texas Glock Switch takedown

While I wont sit here and try to argue that full auto glocks (or any full auto pistol for that matter) are wieldy, You do tend to grossly exaggerate how unwieldy they are in a proficient user's hand. A full auto glock can most certainly be held on a torso sized target at 7-10 yards. But I also wont sit here and try to say that a glock switch is something that I even specifically want. Where the issue lies is with the NFA hand the Hughes Amendment in 1986, which effectively bans the sale of full auto firearms to the civilian populous, unless it was made and registered under the NFA before 1986. This has created a finite supply of legal full auto firearms accessible to the civilian populous, and has caused prices of those firearms to skyrocket to the point of only the super wealthy being able to obtain them. For example, a semi-auto AR-15 can be obtained for $500. A registered full auto AR-15 runs between $30,000-40,000. Under US v. Miller (ironically the case that upheld the NFA), the Court held that firearms protected under the 2A must have a military purpose i.e. be in use in the military. I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that full auto firearms and short barrel rifles aren't in common use in the military, when the standard issue rifle (the M4) is both a SBR and full auto. Short barrel shotguns are also in use, but to a lesser extent no doubt. In addition to US v. Miller, the Court recently held that firearms laws must be rooted in the historical traditions of America. We currently don't have precedent defining what time period specifically constitutes the "Historical Traditions", but whether you look at the establishment of the Bill of Rights, or the Post Antebellum period, neither time period restricts full auto firearms. Regardless of what precedent you look at regarding the 2A, the regulation of full auto firearms should be found unconstitutional. Just my thoughts though.