But what is the “that” it means exactly. I suppose most would say the “that” is “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” This leads to the question: “What is the right of the people to keep and bear Arms?” If this right is not to be infringed we need to know what this right is.
Another post on this forum today ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2990936/posts ) stated:
“In a sweeping ruling, the Tenth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that there is no Second Amendment right to carry a concealed firearm in public”, and further stated “But the final ruling held, “In light of our nation’s extensive practice of restricting citizens’ freedom to carry firearms in a concealed manner, we hold that this activity does not fall within the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections.” (emphasis added).
We talk about “shall not be infringed” plenty. We need to talk more about the scope of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” so that we can establish what is and is not an infringement. If we don’t, it will be done for us. Or rather to us.
From my not super extensive reading of law and the framers intent, “The right of the people to keep and bear arms” applies [should] to any individually portable common infantry weapon available in the time period viewed.
So, theoretically as an un-infringed right, you should be able to have a select fire weapon and it would seem logical that you could also have an attachment like a grenade launcher.
It would not apply to crew served weapons mainly from the fact that said weapons are generally not individually portable. In the past, units would aquire crew served weapons (cannons) and frequently, up to around the Civil War, these would be comissioned/purchased by a wealthy patron or a local community.