You could be right that the founders meant arms to mean just about anything. Regardless, every American has an opinion on guns. The 2nd Amendment, on the other hand, is quite clear. Anyone who thinks “assault” weapons should be banned needs to amend the US Constitution. Opinion is meaningless. It comes down to following the clear intent or rewriting it, and the amendment process is also very clearly defined.
The same thing happens all the time with so-called Christians. Leftists sometimes claim to be Christian, but they invariably pick and choose what Bible verses they support. Unfortunately for them, the Bible doesn’t have an amendment process. It means what it says, and if you don’t agree, you aren’t a Christian.
The US Constitution is also pretty straightforward. Commerce between the states, for example, means literally commerce (commercial transactions) between states. It doesn’t mean the federal government has the right to regulate anything that might somehow be related to or affect commerce somewhere within the states.
The 2nd Amendment is the same. I don’t know why this militia crap is such a big deal, because it’s clear from the text that private citizens are supposed to be allowed to bear arms.
Unfortunately the left has warped the US Constitution so much that even they can’t figure out where to draw the lines anymore. It still comes down to this: if you don’t agree with something in the constitution, write an amendment and convince enough Americans to pass it. That, my FRiend, is how civil people change the law.
And really the part about the militia doesn't matter much since it's in the first clause which is just a preamble to the second clause. The second clause is the "shall" clause that contains the actual operative language. The first clause could have talked about blueberries or something and it wouldn't have changed legal effect one bit.