The more I think about policy, the more it resembles a multi-objective optimisation problem.
Libertarians say they are anti regulation, but I ask them if I can murder them to steal their property.
Apparently they are all in favor of that regulation.
Similar to anti gun control people. Ok, I'm your neighbor, can I arm myself with chemical and biological weapons? Or a conventional bomb that will definitely destroy the entire block?
Hm, funny, they are in favor of some gun control.
Anyway everything I listed is arms.
If you want to be literalist as to the actual arms of the second amendment, then nobody should be armed with anything but a breech loading musket.
How is it anything like having your water supply poisoned. The printer thing doesn't noticeably affect anyone negatively unless they commit substantial crimes. Indeed it likely reduces costs of tracing the origins of printed material when that's important in a criminal investigation.
I'm not sure we have as universal agreement on what constitutes "crime" as you imply. Several whistleblowers have been convicted on the basis of printer watermarks - some of us certainly will fall on the side of preferring the existence of said whistleblowers in the federal government.
Some of those same people developed the surveillance state and the generation that followed thinks we should all wear Meta glasses at all times for “safety”. Meanwhile the advertisers and authoritarians behind them are snickering.