I can't argue against the result of Reinhardt's ruling -- a 3-O decision that California's assault-weapons ban is constitutional. As California Deputy Attorney General Tim Rieger noted, gun ownership can be seen as an individual right and still be subject to restriction in the interest of public safety. That's why your next-door neighbor doesn't own an atomic bomb. Of course there are several other small problems in owning an atomic bomb, like the $ 200 billion it costs to make one from scratch; the lack of fissable material; the stink your neighbors would make when you open your own foundry and chemical plant in their back yards; etc.
From the article: "...gun ownership can be seen as an individual right and still be subject to restriction in the interest of public safety. That's why your next-door neighbor doesn't own an atomic bomb. "
Nonsense. If the Founders of our nation knew about atomic bombs, they could have amended the Constitution. We can do the same. "Weapons of mass destruction", assuming that anyone agrees to a definition, are also "arms".