[Woahhs]

So should citizens have nukes now too because they're the most powerful weapons our government has? A lot has changed since those days.

Just for the record, because no doubt you've had this distinction pointed out before and chosen to ignore it, "arms" are not weapons of mass destruction. The definition of arms was well understood at the founding. That the term "arms" has been arbitrarily co-opted to also denote WMDs does not mean you get the right to them also. Private ownership of WMDs would be the functional equivalent of a private army...the only WMD known at the time...and that is not protected.

Your argument turns on the most simplistic of logical fallacies: the alternative definition of words.

[JediJones]

Once again, you're interpreting what's there your own way. Deciding that armies are equivalent to WMDs is a nice interpretation, but clearly not intended by the constitution since WMDs didn't exist then. I could just as easily say that assault weapons are not what the founders intended to be covered, and would be the equivalent of starting a private army. Like I said, you can always argue that anything not invented at that time isn't covered by the amendment. So O'Reilly's position is not invalid on constitutional terms, it's just an opinion based on practicality and common sense. If you want to convince me or I assume him, you'll have to prove why the unfettered ownership of assault weapons benefits our country.

[btcusn]

Private ownership of WMDs would be the functional equivalent of a private army...the only WMD known at the time...and that is not protected.

Have to question this. The ONLY weapon of mass distruction in those days were biological weapons, which were used by the fur traders (smallpox laden trade blankets).
Private citizens could and did own ALL the weapons the military had, including cannon.

Jack

[El Gato]

Private ownership of WMDs would be the functional equivalent of a private army...the only WMD known at the time...and that is not protected.

The main body of the Constitution, Art I Sec 8, IIRC (where the powers of Congress are enumerated), provides for issuance of letters of Marque. Not much point in that if individuals (or groups) cannot own cannon armed ships. They did of course.