Reply #81: I'll take your changing of arguments and failure to provide any evidence for your arguments

[Hoopla Phil]

as a concession. So on to the new points you bring up.

The whole idea of the 2A only applying to arms of the day when the 2A was written has been well debated, and well debunked time and time again. Read the "Heller" decisions footnotes on the issue for good direction on where to go to educate yourself. (I can provide a link if you cannot find the Heller decision on the internet but I have confidence you can) You can also use the search feature right here on D.U. if you prefer.

On a more reasoned basis let us apply your reasoning to the 1A. Does that mean that newspapers and leaflets must be printed only on Gutenberg presses or their equivalent? Does that mean that there is no free speech protection over the internet?

No and it would be silly in the extreme to suggest such. This is where the "living breathing document" philosophy comes in. The Constitution can be adapted to new times and new technologies. Hell, for a hoot check out in Heller where the M-16 (a real select-fire assault weapon) is singled out as being particularly suited to current militia service. It has a lot to do with commonality of equipment ie. "regulated".

I do find it very telling that you have admitted to supporting confiscation of weapons from American citizens though. Are you a member of Daly's staff?