[kingu]

The natural laws of economics would place limits on the ownership of such weapons, without the government doing so. Nuclear weapons, artillery, and the like are expensive. Only the (very)wealthiest citizens, corporations, and local and state governments could afford them, and that would limit their number and use accordingly.

I appreciate your thinking on such a thing, but the reality is that a deadly chemical and explosive weapons can be made from common goods. Making delivery systems for them as well is easy and inexpensive. Just because a cannon costs tens of thousands in a store does not mean making one runs more than $20. Or a rocket launcher that runs tens of millions can't be reproduced using adopted materials for hundreds.

And would you really care for Apple Militia? Google Forces? NBC Rangers? Or the Rainbow Fudge Packer Squadron launching an attack on Chick-Fil-A?

I'm certainly more concerned with this solution than the existing status of my rights being infringed.

[JRandomFreeper]

does not mean making one runs more than $20.

You've never made a cannon, have you?

Cannons, BTW, are legal to build and own under federal law.

/johnny

[GenXteacher]

“I appreciate your thinking on such a thing, but the reality is that a deadly chemical and explosive weapons can be made from common goods. Making delivery systems for them as well is easy and inexpensive. Just because a cannon costs tens of thousands in a store does not mean making one runs more than $20. Or a rocket launcher that runs tens of millions can’t be reproduced using adopted materials for hundreds.

And would you really care for Apple Militia? Google Forces? NBC Rangers? Or the Rainbow Fudge Packer Squadron launching an attack on Chick-Fil-A?”

If it is as easy as you say, then regulation is pointless- it can’t succeed because it is impossible to enforce. And as for the Rainbow Fudge Packer Squadron, it would be defeated by the Chick-Fil-A Defense Force, or perhaps the National Anti-sodomite Air Corps, Provisional.