Good point. But I was only speaking of armory weapons, which I'd define as explosives-projector and crew-served weapons such as mortars and HMG's.
One's personal weapons, whether a brace of flintlock pistols running all the way up a broad leather sash (a la Edward Teach) or a modern Uzi, would, of course, be the citizen's business.
Congress could attempt, still, to interfere in citizens' attempts to arm themselves, by using its Article I power to prescribe the armament of the Militia. If they say single-shot caplocks only, then that's a problem for the People.
This is what the Constitution says:
"To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, ..."
"To provide for arming the Militia" is not synonymous with "disarming the People". The federal government can provide all the weapons that it wants. It lacks the power to deprive any law-abiding person of their weapons.
Buried on the property of Jones' Tavern were "... three massive pieces, firing 24-pound shot, that were much too heavy to use defensively, but very effective against fortifications, with sufficient range to bombard the city of Boston from other parts of nearby mainland." [From Wikipedia]
The article says that the British commander knew there were arms buried there. These three pieces were destroyed. Those that were moved elsewhere were saved.
There's very little justification for storing ANY arms in a central location, known to the government, if it is at all practical to leave the arms in trusted private hands.