While his retraction smacks of insincerity and +1 job saving-throw, given where he lives, the idea of "certain firearms only belong in LEO/Military hands" is probably, relatively, common enough, even amongst the firearm friendly. Though even as I disagree with Mr. Tsai and much of the populace about what I should and could have access to, there are weapons the public does not need access to. Say missiles, or nuclear bombs. I know there's a world of difference between those types of weapons, but if I claim to be in support of freedom, how can I also be against owning or being able to own any type of property? I also understand that this is how many feel about my ARs, or handguns. I'm likely being over-analytical but the hypocrisy still exists. I desire freedom of property, of association, and travel, yet I still have my own moral lines in the sand. As it pertains to Mr. Tsai, I believe his reasoning is similar, just on a different point of the scale.