I couldn't say it much better than Korimyr has, in his several posts.
Anything a well-equipped infantryman might be carrying, or any weapon useful for self-defense, sport, militia service, or other lawful purposes.
Nukes, bio, chem etc are taking things to ludicrous lengths. Strategic weapons like these are used against large populations, not on the battlefield or in self-defense, sport or other common useage.
One of the problems with this poll is one of the problems we have as a society in defining things surrounding this issue. "Reasonable regulations" means entirely different things to different people.
I think "reasonable regulations" means no WMD's, maybe a shall-issue license for explosives and support weapons; no private arms within prisons, jails, courtrooms or similar areas where security concerns are truly overwhelmingly vital... and not much else. Places that are normally open to the public without restriction should be open to the armed citizen, ie parks, malls, restaurants, etc.
If someone misuses a weapon negligently or criminally, by all means come down on them with the biggest hammer the law has on the books, but no prior restraint.
BTW, with a few exceptions this is what things are like in my home state. With a shall-issue CCW permit you can carry almost anywhere other than secure or posted places. You can own machineguns if you have a Class III license. You can buy most any other firearm freely. Yet, the rate of murder in my home state would come out ahead of virtually any jurisdiction in the USA that has draconian gun control.
As has been said, it is a right, not a privilege. You don't need a license to exercise free speech or freedom of religion.