[iowamark]

I am no expert on the subject, but I doubt if one could argue successfully for a right to private ownership of heavy ordnance.

[zeugma]

I am no expert on the subject, but I doubt if one could argue successfully for a right to private ownership of heavy ordnance.

What do you think a Letter of Marque is? They were issued to what were essentially privately owned warships to protect them from the charge of 'piracy'.

It was not as uncommon as you might believe for private individuals to own cannon. What the hell else is that but 'heavy ordinance'?

[jeffersondem]

“I am no expert on the subject, but I doubt if one could argue successfully for a right to private ownership of heavy ordnance.”

You don’t have to argue the point. In 2018, a U.S. citizen can just pay the $200 federal tax stamp and own a tank with a live tube. I believe there is an additional $5.00 tax for each live round.

And get this: a person can own a working WWII flame thrower and not pay a tax - and not “register” it with the federal government. Yes, it is probably banned in California but in the states where it is legal you almost never read of a drive-by flame thrower attack.

Please don’t tell anyone else.