[vbmoneyspender]

They had bombs and artillery back when the Constitution was adopted by the states, but the 2nd Amendment clearly didn't make provision for the citizenry to have a right to possess or use them. The reason is quite simple, those weapons, like nuclear weapons, ensure that innocent people will be killed if they are used. The same, however, cannot be said of 'assault' rifles, which shoot where you aim them. And if you aim wrong and you kill someone you shouldn't have, well then you go to jail. That's why your right to own a rifle is protected under the Constitution, while your right to own bombs, artillery, tanks, jet fighters and nukes is not.

[JediJones]

Well, that's the most reasonable argument I've heard so far. I don't have a strong opinion on the issue myself. I just think that there is a reasonable discussion to be had on where the line is drawn in terms of what weapons should be legally owned and produced and which ones shouldn't. If someone pulls up data showing me assault weapons have caused more unintended or malicious damage than other legal guns, I would be swayed to that side.

[William Tell]

vbmoneyspender said: "They had bombs and artillery back when the Constitution was adopted by the states, but the 2nd Amendment clearly didn't make provision for the citizenry to have a right to possess or use them."

Could you please explain what laws existed prior to 1934 which prohibited bombs or artillery to any white, free male? Even the 1934 law only required the purchase of a tax stamp. There was no prohibition.

The idea that there are limitations to the right to keep and bear arms is a recent one.

[El Gato]

They had bombs and artillery back when the Constitution was adopted by the states, but the 2nd Amendment clearly didn't make provision for the citizenry to have a right to possess or use them.

That turns out not to be the case. Private ownership of cannon armed warships, was aknowledged in the main body of the Constitution, even before the second amendment was ratified, which provides Congress the power to issue letters of Marque. This ammounted to a "hunting license" for enemy shipping. The individuals didn't need the letter to own the cannon, nor the ships, nor to fit the ships with the cannon (although they did sometimes store the cannon until needed, when the ships were otherwise employed). Towns, more properly the militia of towns, and some indivduals did own artillery at the time. All are "arms" which the right of people to keep and bear is protected by the second amendment.