>>35
I have problems with viewing it as an effective defense against home invaders -- as stated, letting the home owner own a gun means letting criminals have guns too, so you end up with an even worse situation than a society that has banned guns, and as stated, I don't think black market weapons will end up in the hands of petty thieves and other unprofessional criminals.
I said in an earlier post that sport hunters should be allowed to keep their guns, since they aren't using it to commit murder.
I don't really see a problem with the armory idea, besides you pointing out technical problems that could be dealt with if it were actually implemented. It would obviously be heavily guarded to prevent the scenario you predicted. Besides, it wasn't a heavily thought out idea, just a plausible solution to the problem concerning the freedom to defend against the government that would also improve the safety of everyone within society.
It is simply the idea of a gun, and any other lethal weapon, that bothers me. To have it available to the public is to have it available to bad-minded people who would only use it to hurt others. And what would be its purpose outside of that? What is it going to do besides hurt other people? Is a gun useful for anything else? Not really.