If you believe throwing insults and irrelevent quotations is "handing me my head" then you do not know much about logic.
Nor have I taken my opinions from any particular sources outside the Constitution itself and the history of the era.
If you want to insult those who do not believe the 2d amendment means "the right of the people to keep and bear ANY DAMN WEAPON they want" then go right ahead. I do NOT believe that is what it means.
That, is obvious. I've had you pegged as a gun banner from the start. Nice of you to finally step up, be a man, and admit it.
irrelevant quotations?
Pointed excerpts from Washington and Jefferson, the citation of Amendments the Second, the Ninth, the Tenth, and the Fourteenth, as well as USCon:ArtI:Sec8:11 and the posting and transcription of an actual Letter of Marque... these, to you, are "irrelevant"?
My, my...
One must perforce wonder what, to you, passes the bar you set and becomes relevant.
While I do not believe that the Founders would have smiled at the notion of private citizens possessing thermonuclear warheads, chemical weapons, or weaponized pathogens, I do not see how any honest and rational person could even attempt to argue against the abovementioned PROOFS that they did indeed smile on the notion of private ownership of cannon and warships.
By extension, they would have approved of private ownership of armed aircraft and mechanized cavalry. Any counterargument based on these being "crew-served platforms" is ludicrous, in the light of the nature of armed warships - crewed by dozens or even hundreds of men, yet still privately owned and operated.
You have been amply proven to be in error.
Learn.
To do otherwise is folly.
We see the opinion, but fail to see any indication the Founding Fathers (who owned "ANY D@MN WEAPON they wanted") agreed with you.