The Bill of Rights does not enumerate, and so, for this question, I will not enumerate

you get it

well, I would like to keep the definition broad for this question. One may assume rocket launcher, nuclear weapon

wiki may say, but politicians make their own rules as they go, stretching as they need to, to ensure they get the end result they desire.

A meth lab has the potential to be a bomb.

Love ya, Jan

Shouldn't an individual be allowed to own any weaponry necessary for self defense equal to that which might be brought against him/her?

I'm going to ask a question for another perspective...

Let's say I own a nuke, does my neighbor have the right to know?

If I were the neighbor, would I want to know?

I would love to claim the right to own any type of weaponry, but I think that this should fall under the 10th Amendment.

We discussed a similar topic some months ago, sparked by the escape of a king cobra in Florida. I think that Technocracy's answer is along the lines I am thinking: There is no prohibition of the ability to own something, but there are qualifications on the facilities you must have in order to possess something classed as dangerous. So if a college has to have a Biosafety level 4 laboratory facility in order to work with Yersinia pestis, then a private citizen who has a BSL-4 lab can also play with bubonic plague. (This goes for cobras and nukes too.)

Jan

Or you could relate it to your neighbor being allowed to cook meth in his garage.

Presumably you are asking if I can have a nuke. I can't see any philosophical reason why not.

There might be some practical considerations about my using it and some concerns about what might happen if someone takes it from me.

From Wiki "...A weapon, arm, or armament is any device used in order to inflict damage or harm to living beings, structures, or systems..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon
If this is an acceptable definition, then anything from sticks and stones to aircraft carriers and nuclear devices would be weapons. I think the focus of the question needs to be narrowed.

I'm not saying there is a difference or any right. I am saying that when someone determines what a weapon is they can extend that until you are essentially their slave.

Yes, so long as any rules that are applied are exactly the same for all.

The populace must be allowed to have equivalent individual weaponry as the government or its agents. e.g. police and military.

And what difference does it make? I don't care if it's a rocket launcher. :)

Leading question.

What is a weapon?
A rock? A twig? Sharp finger nail? A fist? A screw driver? A pencil/pen? A line of thought? A soda can/bottle? My mouse?

K, I'm not a learned Objectivist, but my opinion is that no governmental agency should be able to tell me what I can or cannot buy