[Eastbound]

"The second to prevent the Federal government from removing arms from the citizenry."

Then one must logically assume that the Citizenry must possess arms superior to those which would be used by the Federal government to dis-arm the Citizenry.

To be under-armed with less firepower would render the Second Amendment useless and pave the way for a tyrannical government which would have an easy win over the Citizens.

If the Amendment was written for the purpose you suggest, then it is for the People to establish the rules of engagement and the weapons to be used therein -- NOT the government.

[robertpaulsen]

Ah, but the Founding fathers were adamantly opposed to a federal standing army. They never envisioned what we have today.

Also, there is no more "well regulated state militia".

Now what do we do about the second amendment?