"you have asked for "a case" and I have given you THE TEXTBOOK.
It is now your task to provide a compelling argument in accord with that textbook which clearly allows the federal government to deny to the private citizen the right to keep and bear heavy weaponry."
No you have incorrectly referenced a document and then made logic leaps not backed by the documents you wish to use as authority.
Again, I have no responsibility to prove private citizens cannot own artillery. They can, the ownership is restricted. There is a vast amount of federal regulation and case law that supports my view and zero as in none that supports yours.
If you doubt me, try buying a missile launcher on E-Bay. The feds will be amused with your defense.
and
I have no responsibility to prove private citizens cannot own artillery
taken together, you are now under such an obligation. Prove your case. Prove my understanding incorrect. Put up or shut up.
and case law is, once again, irrelevant when discussing the meaning of the Constitution. The Constitution predates the case law, and forms the base from which those case laws should be built and understood - NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.