Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

"so long as they could pay for it"

what if they can't pay for it? are gun manufacturers now violating the "equal protection" clause? they're denying people the ability to exercise a constitutional amendment simply based on their ability to pay.

Currently it doesn't matter whether they can pay for it or not as legally they can't have it (gov't tyranny?)

So let's ignore the cost; in principle, for defence against an out of control government for which guns are needed, are USAians who are pro gun also pro the idea private citizens owning serious artillery, explosives, tanks etc?

It is legal to own tanks and flame throwers now.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact