"We'll just repeal the Second Amendment, and then gun rights will magically go away forever." - every room temperature sophist lackwit who's ever wanted to ban guns
Best wishes with that plan. In an I'll-shoot-you-in-the-face-with-a-shotgun-while-laughing-about-it sort of way, right before I leave one of your remaining appendages in orifices unfamiliar to their usual anatomical capability. And then I'll go after your friends and family. With pliers and blowtorches. Pour encourager les autres.
The way I read the Constitution, Article I, Section 8 authorizes Congress to issue letters of Marque and Reprisal, which was to authorize private ship owners and captains to make naval war on designated enemies’ ships.
For the perpetually clot-headed, this was done with cannon of whatsoever size one could acquire and mount on board their private ship (or fleet of same).
In blisteringly simple words, it was understood that anyone could own and possess naval artillery, and operate a man o’ war, and if Congress issued the requisite hunting license, could lawfully turn their weaponry on an enemy’s naval and merchant vessels.
At Lexington and Concord, the British were marching to seize, not muskets and shot, which everyone in a colonial frontier teeming with savage natives and wildlife might encounter and possess, but rather, they were going after supplies of gunpowder (by the cask) and cannon artillery.
(Which the British would eventually get, one muzzle blast at a time, at Bunker and Breed’s Hill some months later. Hurray, Team In Your Face!)
Yet again, private citizens had access to artillery and arsenal quantities of powder (which, BTW, were also the explosives of the day).
So before, during, and after the Revolution, it was understood by custom and practice, as well as specific authorization, that “bearing arms” didn’t means just rifles, but crew-served artillery and explosives sufficient to wage war, at that time, on the most powerful nation on the face of the earth, Britain.
And thus, unless the First Amendment only means inkwells, quill pens, and handbills, rather than radio, television, and satellite TV networks, then the Second Amendment doesn’t just mean rifles that the Fudds think are socially acceptable. It means any weapon of war, including crew-served weapons, artillery shells, (a cannon is useless without the cannon balls), explosives, and yes, for the total historical fucktards among us, it even means battleships.
And the Second Amendment doesn’t grant those rights to us, they proceed from natural laws rights to self-defense, as human beings endowed with them. And they aren’t privileges subject to later revocation on governmental whim; they are the birthrights of free people.
In short, for those with Neanderthal-thickness skulls, and commensurate IQs, the Second Amendment isn't the pink slip for the right in question; it's merely a "No Trespassing" sign.
Any attempt to restrict the people's right to them is, by absolute definition, tyranny.
“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
You want my rights?
Molon labe, bitchez.
Feel free to dispute this train of thought in comments.
Here's a helpful link to the relevant documents.
And, if you thought it was just clever irony that the leading frigate of this nation's navy was named after that exact document, you're a monumental idiot.
A man o' war is my right, and my rights are a man o' war.
Boarders repelled while you wait.