The USSC has said in Miller that the first part of the Second Amendment exists to clarify what is meant by the term "arms". It is not restricted to "hunting" or "sporting" weapons, but nor is it so broad as to include any and all artifacts which could conceivably by used somehow as weapons. After all, if everything that could conceivably be used as a weapon were protected, the government couldn't impose any tariffs or other restrictions on much of anything (an object could be used as a weapon, such restrictions would constitute "infringement").
That's a very interesting observation. Aside from the obvious, steak knives and baseball bats, suddenly I realized the absurdity of limiting the primary thrust of the 2nd amendment to just the 2nd amendment only; regards the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The right of the people to keep and bear _______ (fill in blank with any object) shall not be infringed.
A gun, sword, sling shot, cannon and cross bow are objects with varying degrees of technology. Objects that can be used to very destructive ends against other people and their property. This was Madison's concern that the Bill of Rights would be misconstrued to mean the government could infringe the right of the people to keep and bear any object except for guns. Hence the 9th and 10th Amendments.
Madison was right. Not even the 2nd amendment has been honored. And the politicians and bureaucrats have infringed on the right to keep and bear a long list of objects. Pretty much whatever they can get away with. Their irrational, dishonest and criminal house of cards will come crashing down.
Here's how:
Keep in mind, or, for your edification, technology advances exponentially. See the Law of Accelerating Returns, by Ray Kurzweil. For 2300 years government and religious leaders have adapted the technologies of their day, dogma and propaganda being mainstays. So have the freedom fighters used the technologies to fend off their advances. Because technology advances based on facts and the laws of nature/physics it can advance exponentially. Dogma and propaganda cannot advance much into and not beyond the knee curve of the technology curve. That's where the state of technology is at now. Irrationality, which dogma and propaganda are products of becomes increasingly random and disconnected from the facts and laws of physics.
Irrationality itself becomes decreasingly effective and ever easier to out compete. Until it has virtually no effect on the trajectory of civilization.
Civilization then will look back upon today as an anti-civilization. Where irrationality, human death and destruction had major influence on the trajectory of human lives and societies.
Whatever you're drinking,
I'll have a double.
How many objects are there which would not be protected by a maximally-interpreted Second Amendment? Distilled alcohol may of course be used to make firebombs (surely firebombs predat Molotov). Most objects could be used to strike people. Making water into a striking weapon would have taken a few months (wait for winter) but it could certainly have been used as a weapon once frozen. Even a bag full of wet noodles could have been used as a weapon by stuffing the noodles quickly into the victim's mouth so as to cause choking.