Sure. The Founders were worried about bullets, large capacity magazines, TNT, RPG’s, 50 cal sniper rifles. Right. Thanks Einstein. Keep on believing.
No need to compliment my intelligence. Just read Heller for yourself. Your argument about the full range of weaponry could serve as a nice diversionary tactic for the low information reader, but it fails to address the usability principle of Heller as Heller applied it to handguns. The weapon must be able to serve its purpose, to kill or injure in lawful self defense. Else your right to “keep and bear” is an empty gesture, a right denied.
Believe whatever you like. Your choice. Oliver Wendell Holmes once said the main function of the attorney is to predict what a court will do. While I disagree with Holmes on many issues, I have used this suggestion of his to win for my clients. Based on the law under Heller, if I had a client with an ammo case, I would predict eventual victory under the usability principle. You have offered no point of law, either theoretical or case based, that would suggest otherwise. Only personal invective, which, I assure you, is unconvincing in court.