[af_vet_1981]

This is relevant to gun control how?

The Constitution says the "right to bear arms." The 1828 Webster's dictionary defines "arms" as :

1. Weapons of offense, or armor for defense and protection of the body.
2. War; hostility. Arms and the man I sing. To be in arms, to be in a state of hostility, or in a military life. To arms is a phrase which denotes a taking arms for war or hostility; particularly, a summoning to war. To take arms, is to arm for attack or defense. Bred to arms denotes that a person has been educated to the profession of a soldier.
3. The ensigns armorial of a family; consisting of figures and colors borne in shields, banners, &c., as marks of dignity and distinction, and descending from father to son.
4. In law, arms are any thing which a man takes in his hand in anger, to strike or assault another.
5. In botany, one of the seven species of fulcra or props of plants, enumerated by Linne and others. The different species of arms or armor, are prickles, thorns, forks and stings, which seem intended to protect the plants from injury by animals. Sire arms, are such as may be charged with powder, as cannon, muskets, mortars, &c. A stand of arms consists of a musket, bayonet, cartridge-box and belt, with a sword. But for common soldiers a sword is not necessary. In falconry, arms are the legs of a hawk from the thigh to the foot.

What precisely would you control and restrict "arms" to mean ?

[from occupied ga]

What precisely would you control and restrict "arms" to mean ?

You're the one who wants to restrict it. I see nothing wrong with an individual owning a tank if he wants one (and can afford one). Since the founding fathers issued "letters of marque and reprisal" commissioning what at the time was equivalent to private battleships neither did they.

When you come right down to it weapons of mass destruction exist. They are now under control of the least trustwothty of all entities - governments. Governments were responsible for the murder of 60,000,000 of their own citizens during the 20th century alone. You don't have a problem with artillery and tanks etc in the hands of people like Kim Jong, but you want to see more restrictions on our God given and Bill of Rights enumerated right to defend ourselves against tyranny. I find that attitude both puzzling and disturbing. I am not worried about the random criminal taking my liberty or my property*. It is the legions of JBTs and secret police along with plunder hungry bureaucrats and politicians that need to be kept in check.

*I've been burgularized a couple of time and some individuals attempted to rob me at one time. My total losses to criminals over the years has been at most a couple of thousand dollars. Just guestimating, I've paid in excess of a million dollars in danegeld (taxes) since I started working.