This is a thought experiment and I have no idea how it will turn out. It's prompted by the observation that it's hard to have a rational discussion about guns any more. Feelings are too high.
Suppose, instead of the 2nd Amendment we have now, we had one that read like this:
Scientific advancement being necessary for the prosperity of a free nation, the the right of the people to keep and use chemistry sets shall not be infringed.
Unfortunately, accidents with chemistry sets can happen. Some chemicals are poisonous or become so in combination. Some combinations are explosive. Chemistry can be used to make drugs.
Remembering that we are now dealing with a constitutional right, how does a civilized society deal with chemistry sets?
Suppose, instead of the 2nd Amendment we have now, we had one that read like this:
Scientific advancement being necessary for the prosperity of a free nation, the the right of the people to keep and use chemistry sets shall not be infringed.
Unfortunately, accidents with chemistry sets can happen. Some chemicals are poisonous or become so in combination. Some combinations are explosive. Chemistry can be used to make drugs.
Remembering that we are now dealing with a constitutional right, how does a civilized society deal with chemistry sets?