It's not a straw man argument, no matter how you want to think of it that way.
The question is whether there is any limitation on the 2nd Amendment. Since your attack on me explicitly admits that there is, I established the point. The 2nd doesn't protect the possession of WMDs.
Thank you.
Then, the question is where do you draw the line down from there.
Muskets. Obviously okay. That's what the Founders were familiar with.
So, it's obviously somewhere between muskets and WMDs, so shove your straw man criticism up your musket.
"Then, the question is where do you draw the line down from there. "
Where does the Constitution express limitations due to technology?
"...so shove your straw man criticism up your musket."
Well, it's nice to see that you've got the attitude and maturity of a 6-year-old. Congratulations.
As I said before, our troops in Iraq have drawn the line between AK-47s and RPG launchers. I think that's a fair line, and I'm sure that our troops are a lot less ignorant than you. If you think the line should be somewhere else, then explain where you think it should be and why without making false accusations saying that I want people to have WMDs.