[Porsche-O-Phile]

Devil's Advocate here:

Assume for a moment that state restrictions on firearms are lifted and the individual right to keep and bear arms is upheld. Where does it end? Does it? Can the private individual go buy howitzers? F16s? Stinger missiles? Nuclear weapons? Hell, I'm sure the defense contractors would be tripping over themselves to sell these kinds of things to people, but where exactly would the restrictions end?

This issue is bound to come up in at least one of the decisions, either for or against.

If the argument is centered on the INDIVIDUAL assuming the rights and responsibilities of what used to be state militias, should the individual also not have access to military hardware? After all, a state militia was a MILITARY entity. They fought organized campaigns and battles in the interest of a governing body. That sounds like a military to me, albeit not a federal one. If the argument is made that the individual differs from a state militia, then we're on very shaky ground indeed and you better hide 'em or start locking 'em up, cause it won't be long until they start banning private ownership by default.