|
You were cooking with gas up until the last paragraph, Kurtz. At the time of the writing of the Bill of Rights, there was no real substantive difference in technology between a firearm used by the miltary and one used for civilian purposes. They were essentially the same. Saying that the 2nd Amendmant is designed ONLy to protect military firearms is entirely innaccurate. Saying it was intended only to protect firearms for military and self-defense against a tyrannical government would be correct.
At the time of the 2nd Amenmant, the vast majority of firearms were the same basic design, being muzzle-loaded black-powder weapons, ignited by a flintlock type action. There were some that were both behind and ahead of the curve, but that was the standard. Said rifle was used commonly both for civilian purposes and pressed into action by the military. It was cutting edge, in essence, and had been so fro quite some time. There are some published reports of an interesting screw-action loading advancement being used in the ARW, but the British Col that came up with the idea was killed rather early on, and his design did not gain popularity as a result.
Back to the point though, again you have to read what the Founders wrote outside of the Bill of Rights if you wish to better divine their intent. The 2nd Amendmant was pruposefully written in a relatively broad and vague fashion so as to not allow the government room to maneuver around it easily.
|