pg 52/53
It follows that the weapons described in the Act were in common use at the time, particularly when one considers the widespread nature of militia duty. Included among these militia weapons were long guns (i.e., muskets and rifles) and pistols. Moreover, the Act distinguishes between the weapons citizens were required to furnish themselves and those that were to be supplied by the government. For instance, with respect to an artillery private (or matross), the Act provides that he should furnish himself with all the equipments of a private in the infantry, until proper ordnance and field artillery is provided. Id. at 272. The Act required militiamen to acquire weapons that were in common circulation and that individual men would be able to employ, such as muskets, rifles, pistols, sabres, hangers, etc., but not cumbersome, expensive, or rare equipment such as cannons. We take the outfitting requirements of the second Militia Act to list precisely those weapons that would have satisfied the two prongs of the Miller arms test. They bore a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, because they were the very arms needed
53
for militia service. And by the terms of the Act, they were to be personally owned and of the kind in common use at the time. The modern handgunand for that matter the rifle and long-barreled shotgunis undoubtedly quite improved over its colonial-era predecessor, but it is, after all, a lineal descendant of that founding-era weapon, and it passes Millers standards. Pistols certainly bear some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia. They are also in common use today, and probably far more so than in 1789. Nevertheless, it has been suggested by some that only colonial-era firearms (e.g., single-shot pistols) are covered by the Second Amendment. But just as the First Amendment free speech clause covers modern communication devices unknown to the founding generation, e.g., radio and television, and the Fourth Amendment protects telephonic conversation from a search, the Second Amendment protects the possession of the modern-day equivalents of the colonial pistol. See, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27, 31-41 (2001) (applying Fourth Amendment standards to thermal imaging search).
Anything that could be used for militia service or self defense is expressly PROTECTED. This would include machine guns.
Heck it would include SAMs, both MANPAD and larger ones. Would be useful after the next hijacking. Of course if all the passengers, or a significant fraction of them, are armed, there will be no next hijacking. The plane might be blown up, but it won't be hijacked and flown into any building.