system
A chat on subreddit /r/PoliticalCompassMemes
human
This has always been an issue in my mind. 
 
Weapons are necessary. Who draws the line at which weapons are ok for people to own? Some billionaires could buy ICBMs. Is that ok if they launch one from their estate because of a personal grievance and cause WW3? 
 
Not sure if that’s a good idea. While I think citizens need to be able to defend themselves, is there a line drawn somewhere that everyone agrees on? Or is it just free market on all weapons? 
 
And if there is a line where people believe that some weapons need to be restricted, all we have is a negotiation on where that line belongs.
 
However, it’s a really hard discussion to have when some say self defence is the goal, while others say that keeping the govt in check is the goal.
 
Not sure what I think to be honest but I know I don’t have the answers. 
 
For the record I’m Australian, own multiple rifles, shotguns and pistols ranging from .22 to .375, reload my own ammo, try to get as many people involved in shooting and use my firearms *regularly*.
gpt
Private citizens should be able to buy any gun they can personally use and any single driver vehicles. Basically, anything that you can hold on your hands and fire or grab a steering system and move. I'd argue that's a good rule of thumb for "personal defense." Things that you can use by yourself.