He makes a great point about Miller protecting weapons used by militia and thus all rifles based on assault-rifle patterns.
However, he's got at least two very serious factual errors that make me suspect the rest of his historical information.
The first I noticed was his comment about the Bill of Rights and the constitution being passed together. This is flat wrong. The constitution was ratified and went into effect in 1789. The Bill of Rights was ratified and went into effect in 1791.
The second I noticed was his comment about the 2A holding a place early in the list. Formerly, it was fourth on the list. And, it didn't move to second because of importance. It started with anti-Federalists raising a ruckus during the constitution's ratification period about creating a fedgov that would grow and become too powerful, and having no Bill of Rights. The anti-Federalists nearly derailed ratification. James Madison, a Federalist, finally realized that they would have to provide a Bill of Rights, and offered to receive proposals for a bill of rights from the states that would be sifted and culled into one proposal. This silenced enough resistance that the constitution was then ratified and went into effect.
Madison received the state proposals for rights to include in the Bill of Rights. He sifted and culled them into twelve articles. It was one amendment with twelve articles. This was sent back to the states for ratification. The first two articles were not approved by enough states to become operative. The last ten articles did. Thus, our first amendment today, was actually number three on the list that was sent to the states for ratification.
You can learn more about this here: http://www.constitution.org/bor/amd_cong.htm Also, there is a very good book, Origins of the Bill of Rights by Leonard Levy. Excellent book. Packed with info.
So, its kinda foolish to give weight or emphasis to the position of the RKBA amendment as second on the list today. It was originally fourth on the list and only bumped up to second because not enough states ratified the first two articles.
Thus, I'm afraid I am suspicious about the rest of his historical accuracy.
An interesting little sidenote: one the first two Articles of Amendment that was not ratified concerned pay raises for congress. Many years later, a fellow decided to push it through. Turns out there is no expiration date for a state's ratification of a proposed amendment. So, the ratifications of those states who did approve the first two articles were still valid. Meaning, the fella didn't have to start from scratch--a number of states had already ratified the article about congressional pay raises back in 1791. The ratification process was revived and in 1992 it became our latest amendment. That is to say, our last amendment was one of the first proposed.