  In the future, the United States government can seek to limit the ownership
and usage of cyber weapons. The question is whether the Second Amendment to the
United States Constitution gives a right to bear and own military-grade cyber
weapons, and if so, under which conditions. The framers of the Bill of Rights,
ratified in 1791, did not limit the right to bear arms to defined weapons such
as long rifles and pistols, but instead chose the broader word arms. The United
States Supreme Court, in the case District of Columbia v. Heller, upheld a
demarcation between dangerous and unusual weapons that are not permissible to
own and weapons protected by the Second Amendment. Cyber weapons take the form
of dual-use software, often shared and globally distributed that in most cases
can be weaponized for harmful purposes. In recent years, major corporations
have sought to hack back, and if the hack back is authorized, the question
becomes whether corporations have digital gun rights. Even if corporations are
considered US persons, they do not automatically obtain digital gun rights
based on the Second Amendment. This article discusses the core constitutional
challenges for the United States government in prohibiting individual ownership
of cyber weapons and the rationale for why corporations are in a weaker
position regarding ownership of cyber arms. The argument brought forward is
that individuals can claim Second Amendment protection of their right to own
military-grade software tools, but corporations must meet additional criteria
to do so.
