Just because I am against any sort of violation of the right to own and to carry weapons, it doesn’t mean I think everyone should have nukes. I’m opposed to anyone owning nuclear weapons– especially governments. (But I’m also opposed to government employees possessing any sort of weapon while on the “job”. They have proven they can never be trusted.)
I can’t figure out how anyone could ever use nukes (on Earth, anyway) strictly defensively without damaging the life, liberty, or property of innocents (“collateral damage”). If you can’t do something without archating, then it can’t be a right.
Yes, I realize possessing nuclear weapons isn’t the same as using them. Is not possessing nukes a credible threat to use them, which necessarily means archating? If not, then I’m wrong.
Being against the possession of nuclear weapons doesn’t mean I want governments banning them from private hands. That’s worse than letting the fox guard the henhouse. Much worse. Government doesn’t have the right, nor does it have the imaginary quality called “authority“, to forbid others from owning anything, including nuclear weapons.