Okay. There was a time when we used horses, carriages, bicycles, and because those things moved relatively slowly we could work out pretty equitable ways to share the road. We came up with cars, and after a while it became apparent that people needed to be trained and regulated
in piloting missiles weighing quite a lot at high speeds, aimed at one another. No one in their right mind would suggest that licensing drivers is an infringement of anyone's personal freedom, because we realize we're all in it together and your right to drive willy nilly might infringe on my right to continue living and we want it to work out for all of us.
Weaponry is only going to become more sophisticated. The idea of regulating it has to be embraced. Yes, our constitution protects the right to arm yourself. If you want as many muskets as you can find, have at it. If you want military assault weapons, I want to know, first of all, why you feel you need those, and at the very least want it to be known that you have them. And I think you ought to have to pass some pretty rigorous tests. Because you are automatically a little sketchy.
There is this weird argument that, well, the weapons already exist, so there's nothing we can do. As if making it conspicuously inappropriate to own an assault weapon would have no effect. As if people can't be expected to qualify to drive a car.
I don't care if people have handguns and hunting rifles. And muskets. But as technology changes weaponry, we have to take some responsibility as a society just in favor of making a few rules. Because it's not okay with me if you live next door and have assault weapons, or a targeted missile or your own strike drone. Can we at least agree that it's a good idea to have some rules? Sheesh.