You are certainly more informed than I regarding the use of smallpox as a weapon. Jenner's development of a vaccine came in 1796, so I am puzzled as to how one could handle smallpox infected blankets without incredible risk to himself or the people he was trying to protect.
I disagree with your distinction regarding individual rights versus national action against an enemy. The whole point of the Second Amendment is that the federal government can become the enemy of the people, use its control of the army to tyrannize the people, and thus the people must have the means to defeat the tyrants and re-establish a free state.
I also disagree with your claim in the posted article that a machine gun is of "slightly more questionable" justification with regard to target discrimination. Having trained on the M-16, I assure you that it does not belong among those arms which might reasonably be outlawed as being indiscriminate.
I am also puzzled by your assertion that an anti-tank rocket is less discriminating than a cannon shooting ball shot.
That's okay, William, failure to know something is no sin. The method of handling these blankets consisted of using individuals who had been exposed to smallpox as a child and were thusly immune.
The whole point of the Second Amendment is that the federal government can become the enemy of the people, use its control of the army to tyrannize the people, and thus the people must have the means to defeat the tyrants and re-establish a free state.
Today, both in my concept of discrimination of weapons and in practicable reality of access to weapons, firepower required to repel a standing army is not available to the common person. Therefore, you will need to use small arms to 'trade up' and also to rely on the patriotism of service personnel to 'liberate' indiscriminate weaponry. There is no other present way to contest a standing army.
I also disagree with your claim in the posted article that a machine gun is of "slightly more questionable" justification with regard to target discrimination. Having trained on the M-16, I assure you that it does not belong among those arms which might reasonably be outlawed as being indiscriminate.
I also have trained on the M-16, and the H&K MP5. The firearms are controllable and one can be reasonably discriminating with them, but there is a very slight degree of a lack of discrimination. Because of this, I would do the following: Repeal the 1934 NFA, repeal the 1986 Manufacturing Ban, and the sole check I would place on them is a normal Brady check. I would, of course, repeal Brady for all non-class III hardware.
I am also puzzled by your assertion that an anti-tank rocket is less discriminating than a cannon shooting ball shot.
The violence of the explosion at the terminus of the ordnance trajectory makes it less discriminating.