That price hasn't changed in nearly 30 years. Amazing.
When I was in the army, we got new Colt M4's for the whole company. Got 'em in the box new, with a blank adapter, a sling, and one or two magazines (I forget). I'll never forget that invoice. The one that listed the price as $600.00 something, and this was in 2002.
Firearm prices are grossly inflated, especially for autos. THAT was the purpose of the ban, the purpose of all bans really. The government stands by that supply and demand model when it suits them. They wanted to ban them, but that is in itself illegal (they can't ban outright, but what they can do is regulate it to death --drugs aren't banned, they are taxed, but no tax stamp has ever been issued for drugs, hence they are "banned" through regulation). Tobacco has a tax stamp too. To make it illegal, all they have to do is stop issuing the tax stamp.
The '86 law sped this process up. By not allowing tax stamps to be issued for new weapons, the supply dwindles and dries up, thus artificially inflating the prices. See how our government works?
But honestly, in the hands of a trained individual, and I mean a WELL trained indvidual, the semi auto rifle is ten times more lethal than the full auto. Easily. If I had to choose between a full auto all the time or a semi only, I'd pick the semi everytime. I had my full auto kicks in the army and the only one I care to fire anymore is the GE minigun, but only if I don't have to pay for the ammo!
With all the laws today, it would be stupid for anyone to own a full auto for anything other than novelty, range, or SHTF. Simply for the reason that you run the risk of 5 bonus prison years, under NFA law, if that home invader you waxed in your living room with a burst to the chest is ruled a non-justifiable homicide. For that reason alone, I would never use an NFA item in defense, unless all the gloves are off.
Yeah, we COULD go back to pre-'86 --if ban by regulation weren't the objective.