You've been left with nothing but absurd comebacks on a serious subject.
If you believe that a Russian Air Force base could be built on a parking lot in the United States, then I don't see the reason why I could expect you to debate this with any degree of intelligence.
It's like debating with my six year old.
The point is simple...the Second Amendment does no more give you the right to enter my property carrying a gun against my wishes, than it gives me the right to preach Islam in your front yard against yours.
The Constitution is a constraint on government, not an imposition on citizens.
You've been arguing for some absurd Constitutional right to park, it's been more than established that your right to bear arms is not conflicted by my refusal to allow you access to my property bearing arms, your only argument being that it is inconvenient to park elsewhere.
You have no Constitutional right not to be inconvenienced.
Do you think the government is infringing upon your property Rights by saying you can't build a Russian airbase on it?
Isn't it your property, and shouldn't you be able to contract with whomever you choose?