Incorrect.
You neglect “and Proper”.
A “N&P” example is paying salaries to federal employees.
But just because something seems necessary, if it is also not proper it is not “necessary and proper”.
And do you seriously believe that lovers of Arbitrary government, lusting after power in all circumstances whatsoever would EVER question their right to do as they pleased?
As for your last point, there had already been considerable improvement in Arms and Munitions during the lives of the Founders, which they were often greatly interested in, and showed no hint of believing that the deadliness of same would somehow cease to increase over time. Saying they didn’t envision a particular weapon to be placed under the authority of the Commander in Chief, the civilian head of the armed forces, is meaningless to the fact that they foresaw the need for Congress in the future to write the rules and regulations for armed forces.
If your contention, one not uncommon, had been the case they might have felt themselves able to write such rules for all time, rather than leaving it a Power to Congresses in the future.
“Saying they didn’t envision a particular weapon to be placed under the authority of the Commander in Chief, the civilian head of the armed forces, is meaningless to the fact that they foresaw the need for Congress in the future to write the rules and regulations for armed forces.”
You must have reading comprehension problems. In case you can’t understand what delegation of powers mean, it means that “they foresaw the need for Congress in the future to write the rules and regulations armed forces.” Therefore, Congress delegated that the president shall have the use of a nuclear football.
I don’t know what you are arguing about. Just because I relate how Congress works doesn’t mean I agree with it. Most of the laws they pass are unconstitutional.