The Second Amendment clearly states that the inalienable right of each American citizen to keep and bear arms (i.e., firearms) SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED by the government - period, end of story. And, since the Founding Fathers clearly stated that another additional benefit associated with this individual, inalienable right is that such appropriately armed individual citizens could come together to form a military force (i.e., militia) in times of need to effectively oppose tyranny - whether from inside our own government or from outside the nation. So, the Founding Fathers obviously intended the firearms to be kept and born by individual American citizens to be of modern quality that would effectively compete with that of any opposing military force they would face. Since libtards like to call The Constitution a "living, breathing document," the definition of "arms" would obviously and necessarily develop with the times - from muskets, when it was written, to fully automatic assault rifles and explosive devices employed by modern day military forces. However, I am quite willing to concede that heavy machine guns, heavily armed vehicles, most explosive devices, etc. that are designed to inflict multiple casualties all at once are really only appropriate for applications against military forces; therefore, there really is no need for individual American citizens to keep such arms in their homes or bear them out in public - unless, of course, we are under military attack from subversive forces within our government or from foreign forces. Besides, such heavy weaponry is more than likely way beyond the means of most individual American citizens to buy and keep at home, anyway.
The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic, and a killer. It has never yet melted. ~ D.H. Lawrence
| 
