I've been reading up on it quite a bit lately, and I still feel like the line of "well, duh. Of course you can't have that" is a bit confusing.

It always sounds like hyperbole, but just how much are we allowed to own? I know there are laws regarding bombs, highly militarized weapons, etc - why do we accept that our (and other) government can have such weapons, but we cannot. I would say that severely hampers my ability to form a viable militia.

I realize that much of the modern definition is framed by the right to protect the self and personal property, and that a nuclear weapon isn't capable of such specificity, but where is this decided? And/or specified? And then what about the right to a militia? I obviously have many more questions than answers, and I hate that It's nearly impossible to get anyone to talk about that w/o immediately taking sides and spitting talking points at me.

There is obviously a generally accepted level of regulation somewhere, but we don't seem to talk about it much. I'd like to talk about it, so why is the fine argument being treated as a direct attempt to take all guns out of the hands of the people?