To play devils advocate for a moment.
With your line of thinking, you must be a proponent of assault weapon bans, or an opponent of conceal and carry. The thinking that just because people have these weapons that there will be mass killings in the street, simply because someone was slightly annoyed by another person.
So following your logic that from a public safety standpoint people shouldn't be allowed recoilless rifles. To continue with that line of thinking "assault weapons" should be banned, and conceal and carry should be repealed. For the public safety of course. Why? Because ordinary citizens wouldn't know how to handle such weapons, or have the discipline or knowledge for appropriate use of said weapons.
The reason that I oppose private ownership of ordinance of that caliber is out of concern for the damage that an accidental discharge or mishandled explosives can do. Mess up with even the most powerful handgun or rifle and the collateral damage is limited, mess up with a beast like the one pictured above and you'll level a storefront.
With your line of thinking, you must be a proponent of assault weapon bans, or an opponent of conceal and carry.
Not at all. I think that "assault weapon bans" are unconstitutional, and concealed carry solves far more problems than it causes. My opposition to private citizens owning crew serviced weapons is the "oops" factor. Even well `trained professionals in the military screw up with that type of dangerous equipment from time to time, and the potential for even a well trained armature to do major damage in a population center is just too high. That's not to mention what criminals and terrorists could do with that sort of equipment if it was more readily accessible.