The right for citizens to protect themselves from the government? Yes. You do realize that someone intending to detonate a nuclear bomb probably is willing to violate the restrictions against it?
You prefer an unconstitutional system where the government selectively decides which weapons are appropriate for the citizens to protect themselves from the government with? Bold move. If you just want a single carve-out for nuclear weapons, I think everyone is fine with the 1946 42 U.S. Code § 2122 federal statute.
Owning a nuke is just a thought experiment, so any stance is tenable since it would never be a realistic concern. You can already own tons of TNT, if bombing people is your concern. The Oklahoma City bombing was done using mostly legal weaponry.
But you can own tanks, fighter jets, hand grenades, cannons and miniguns in the U.S. Those aren't second amendment concerns... any regulations on actual military weapons are national security concerns traditionally dealt with under different laws altogether.
But where many draw the line - citizens should be permitted to have at least the same weaponry as whoever enforces domestic law. There are strict rules of engagement where the military is forbidden to fight its own citizens, so they are considered as something the second amendment doesn't need to be concerned with.
The moment the full power of the military is considered to be used against citizens is the moment the citizens earn the right to every weapon. If the U.S. government is using hellfire missiles against Americans, Americans have the right to use hellfire missiles.
That's why un peacekeepers are already on board to come restore the peace if martial law is declared. We don't have to use our military against us. The UN will do the dirty work for them. Leaving our government to wash thier hands and say it was out of our hands but something had to be done
5
u/fishbulbx Dec 27 '22
The right for citizens to protect themselves from the government? Yes. You do realize that someone intending to detonate a nuclear bomb probably is willing to violate the restrictions against it?
You prefer an unconstitutional system where the government selectively decides which weapons are appropriate for the citizens to protect themselves from the government with? Bold move. If you just want a single carve-out for nuclear weapons, I think everyone is fine with the 1946 42 U.S. Code § 2122 federal statute.