If there were any rational basis for that argument, then you would have to equally apply it to the First Amendment, and apply it only to means of communication, and to religions, which existed at the time it was written.
You could communicate by standing on a soapbox in the public square and speaking to anyone there who would listen, or you could print flyers, handbills,and newspapers with an old-fashioned hand-operated printing press, using type that had to be set or carved by hand; but the use of any more modern technology would not be protected. And as a Mormon, my freedom of religion would not be protected, since my religion didn't exist when the First Amendment was written.
By your logic, the First Amendment would not prohibit government from denying me the right to practice my religion; and it would not prohibit government from imposing restriction s on what messages may be communicated over the Internet, over any electronic technology, and even by more modern printing methods than existed in the late 18th century.
The Second Amendment only guarantees a right to what was in existence when it was written.
By the way, rifles were known in that time, and in fact, played an important role in our victory in the Revolutionary war. Conventional methods of warfare, at the time, revolved around muskets, which were, as this meme says, not terribly accurate, but they were relatively quick to reload. Rifles of the time were much slower to reload, but had much greater range and accuracy, and in many instances, Americans used them to great effect in the Revolution, to pick off British soldiers well before they got close enough to make any effective use of their muskets.
