Rocket launchers yes, also anti-air and anti-ballistic-missile systems, but not the nukes themselves. The thing of it is that the government should not be smugly declaring the populace cannot stop an attempt at tyranny, readily answering F-15s and nuke deployment, but it should be able to deal with lone madmen, which personal weapons of mass destruction go over the line for.
Ideally, things should be set up so that the government itself being the madmen is reasonably dealt with, which when respecting having force concentrations able to deal with extremely wealthy lone madmen generally means decentralizing so that "the government" is not a monolith but rather has to have agreement among separate governing bodies.
The usual separation of powers isn't good for this because it has all executive power of enforcement be one branch, so it is extremely vulnerable to coups, to the point of a few cases where a bloodless coup could have happened from popular sentiment being out of synch with the official process. If it weren't for the Uniparty bullshit having the generals, it could happen today.
You really do need to have the military separated, in the end, so that if civil war occurs you are not reliant upon defectors from existing chains of command, but rather can trust to have fully separate chains of command to side in full. Mostly because of the fact that funding serious defensive forces has far exited any remotely plausible militia budget.