[zackzackzack]

Part of the social contract in most societies is that the police are the only members of society who can use enough force to kill or injure anyone critically. The governments of these societies create laws to ensure that it is only special well regulated instances when an ordinary citizen can use deadly force (hunting of lower animals and self defense being two examples in the United States). Anywhere these guns can be manufactured successfully thwarts the old laws and contracts.

This means that it will be a "Problem", but no one can say for who. The big gun manufactures are going to be pissed and are already probably already preparing legislation to bitch slap any one who tries to produce these guns. The liberator people are working on making the guns not explode and hurt anyone. The police are scrambling to figure out how to reclaim their sole ownership of force. The people are waiting to see what happens.

[epochwolf]

This isn't part of the social contract in parts of the US. Guns are pretty common in rural areas and I've see people open carry in urban areas around Seattle.

[a-priori]

He is referring to the principle of the state's monopoly on violence. It's necessary for some violence to exist to maintain internal and external security (police and the military, respectively). The more effective the state, the theory goes, the better able it is to maintain control over the use of violence in its territory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence

[sp332]

It's still illegal (and not socially accepted) to use those guns outside of the "well regulated instances" zackzackzack mentioned.