In the TNG episode "The Most Toys", the Varon-T disruptor is specifically mentioned as being illegal in the Federation because of its particularly cruel method of killing. Singling out a specific weapon and saying that it is banned seems to imply that other weapons are not banned. Does the Federation have a general right to bear arms for civilians? For example, if a civilian wants to walk across the 24th century Golden Gate Bridge with a Klingon disruptor pistol strapped to his belt for non-aggressive reasons (personal protection, because it looks cool, family heirloom, cultural or religious requirement, whatever), is this allowed? If there are restrictions (e.g. stun weapons only unless a civilian weapons license is held, no disintegrators, max battery capacity, must be 21, etc.), what are they?
In Star Trek V, it is specifically mentioned that Nimbus III, the "Planet of Galactic Peace", which is jointly administered by the Federation, Klingons, and Romulans, bans civilian ownership of weapons, also implying that civilians not on Nimbus III do have access to weapons (otherwise, banning them on Nimbus III would lack significance).
On pre-Federation Earth, we see an apparently civilian farmer with a plasma weapon (ENT: Broken Bow), so there seems to be some precedent for personal weapon ownership beyond the 21st century.