eye95
Well-known member
I think it can be safely assumed that the founders had no concept of wmd's as we know them today. Furthermore, I believe their intention was to protect the right to maintain small arms and weapons of insurrection as they could forsee. For example, handguns, rifles, shotguns and edged weapons. Whether they intended for individuals to own cannon and shot for example, I rather doubt simply for the reason that this would be rather impractical for the common man, most of us wouldn't have much practical use for artillery. This would fall under the " power to raise an army" clause in my opinion. However, as it happens I know a gentleman who makes 12lb smooth bore cannons that work.
While no one probably conceived of making individual cannon ownership unlawful, I don't doubt that the Founders would have seen such as constitutional.
Being that a cannon is a crew-served weapon, and pretty hard to bear, it just doesn't make sense with a plain-reading of the 2A as an individual right to keep and BEAR arms. Madison even gave us insight to what they meant when he stated that invaders would be given pause by know that they'd face "a militia amounting to near a half a million citizens with arms in their hands."