If you're not going to hold the amendments to the historical technological limits, then your previous argument is invalid.
What you're calling a "strawman", is a thorough refutation of your argument. But just because you don't like it, doesn't make it a strawman.
Based upon the strict literal interpretation of the meaning of "bear", the only weapons that are covered are those that can be "borne", i.e. carried by 1 person. This specifically excludes things like crew-served weapons, such as SAWs, mortars, artillery, etc., and complex machinery such as tanks, jet fighters, and combat ships, all of which require a crew and/or a support structure.
Things like biological / nuclear / chemical weapons are not covered, either, since they're not "arms" but rather "weapons of mass destruction". The key differences are: a.) the effects of NBC's cannot be restricted to any one person / target in particular (i.e. you CAN target a pistol round to harm only 1 individual, you canNOT target a nuke or a cloud of sarin in the same way), and b.) they're likely to cause permanent and extensive damage to structures, biosphere, and environment, i.e. the effects of the weapon will persist much longer than the tactical significance of the target.
So, no tanks, nukes, jets, artillery pieces, neurotoxin SCUDs. Regardless of whether you can afford it or not. Arms, yes. Weapons of mass destruction, no.
Reality according to US Congress:
- A psycho decides to murder children / shoot up a mall full of people
- The psycho gathers firearms, ammunition, and/or explosive devices
- The psycho heads out to the school / playground / mall (full of nicely unarmed victims, no potential resistance)
- The psycho sees a sign that says "Gun-Free Zone"
- The psycho says to himself, "Oh noes! No guns! What am I going to do? Well, I guess I'll just go home now."
- The psycho goes home & goes back to watching TV
the language of the law is so amazingly vague
Vague laws & variable enforcement = pathway to tyranny.
You can be arrested for even being suspected of having illegal gun parts - high-capacity magazines, silencers & fittings, automatic sears (yes, Citizen, a cube of metal 1/2" on the side can equal 5 years in jail...), even rubber O-rings that can be qualified as being "potential parts of grenade launcher attachments". Vague definition = arrest, fine, jail time, and a ruined life... for a piece of metal or an O-ring.
Meanwhile, David Gregory can wave around a highly illegal high-capacity magazine on public TV, and the DA will "decline to prosecute". Because the law that will land YOU in jail doesn't apply to the Ruling Class. Variable enforcement = some people are above the law.
It wasn't necessarily that the information was misleading, but that it would lead patients to make decisions about their own care without necessarily consulting a doctor, which the FDA thinks is not a good idea -- and I totally see their point, frankly.
So, by the same logic, let's shut down:
- wikipedia.org - plenty of medical information there
- Merck Manual at www.merck.com/pubs/mmanual/
- ...and about 1000 more
Oh noes! Medical information out in the open! How dare those peasants make decisions for themselves! We must protect them from themselves!
Yeah, let's deny information (however flawed it may be, it's better than nothing) to people with a capacity for independent thought, for the sake of coddling & protecting the morons.
But noooo, we can't have that, let's shut down the information for EVERYONE because SOME people might misinterpret, or because there's a TINY error chance in the testing process.
Typical American attitude - "this might annoy/damage some morons, so let's shut it down for everyone".