ebrown_p wrote:Armor-piercing sawed-off shotguns.
Yummy!
Two separate things. Shotguns are about the last weapons that would be capable of firing AP ammo.
The argument for the right to have AP ammo is the strongest, IMO:
We have the right to be armed in defense of criminals, and sometimes criminals wear body armor.
The argument in favor of sawed-off shotguns is that, so long as armor penetration is not an issue, shotguns are great for home defense (and are ideal for defense against dangerous animals), and shorter barrels make them more maneuverable and handy.
The argument in favor of having an M16 with three shot burst is that it is the standard infantry rifle of the United States -- what people would be required to bring with them if the government asked them to form a militia.
The argument in favor of belt-fed, tripod mounted machineguns is rather a longshot, but they might help storeowners defend their business during a riot. As I recall reading once, there were draft riots in New York City during the Civil War, and when the rioters surged towards the New York Times building, the owner fired a few warning shots from the Gatling gun he had set up on the roof. And the rioters suddenly found they had pressing business elsewhere.
