How can it possibly be Constitutional to ban weapons based on their suitability for militia service, when the courts have used suitability for militia service as the standard for WHAT IS legal to possess? Sawed off shotgun, not protected by 2nd A. Rifle with bayonet lug, protected.
Remember back in the 1960s when they wanted to ban 5-shot bolt action Army Surplus rifles because they were “Military”. Too cheap compared to a US made sporting rifle, and they were issued to “Military”!
They got the ban in 1968.
So the importers started importing surplus “Police Rifles” that came from the same factories, Same calibers, same stocks, same proof marks. But they had NOT been issued to the military so they were A-OK for import.
This silliness was finally stopped in the 1980s and bolt action army surplus rifles were again allowed in.