The error is yours my friend.
If you are right, then there's no need for anyone to get a warrant to tap your phone.
You're right -- it -protects- the right of the individual citizen, regardless of his relationship to or with any militia, to own and use guns, for any legal purpose.
It doesn't even explicitly say "Guns".
It says "arms".
There's absolutely no sound argument that this term does not include every class of firearm.
First off..I showed you where you were wrong. The second amendment makes no provision for "persons", the fourth does.
Second off, initially defense was to be handled by Militias and a permanent navy. The Constitution expresses that in several clauses. However, after disbanding the Continetal Army, the government found that solution to be un-workable, hence, a standing permanent army was created. Which, is not Constitutional.
Third, the government makes many forms of arms, illegal. I showed in another thread where Nunchucks are banned. So are switchblades, blackjacks, brass knuckles and a host of other "arms". There are no lobbyists for those weapons..and a big one for guns. That's what drives this irrational and completely Unconstitutional drive to keep guns in the hands of citizens..to the determent of the country.
