For those who claim the 2A is an absolute right due to the "infringement" clause need to consider something.
If it's unlimited and absolute, that means having a WMD is
legal for
a six year old child as well as you, your neighbor or the unemployed sanitation worker on the next block. Sure, sure... as long as he doesn't do any harm... though any one of these people becoming bitter and suicidal will not be worried about some government agency filtering their remains out of the troposphere to put him on trial.
And by the way, C.D.Hands -- that's just one reason WMDs are probably safer in the hands of a government than a private party. We can add other things like physical security and maintenance to that list.
Your right to own arms suitiable to militia purposes
can be revoked if you commit a serious crime. Those who are not peaceable citizens can be denied the use of arms.
(
Ref: "And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; ..." -- Samuel Adams, Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of 1788)
As to "militia arms" we can look to the Militia Act to see what is required of your average "grunt".
Section I: ...That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and power-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a power[sic] of power[sic]; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack. That the commissioned Officers shall severally be armed with a sword or hanger, and espontoon; and that from and after five years from the passing of this Act, all muskets from arming the militia as is herein required, shall be of bores sufficient for balls of the eighteenth part of a pound; and every citizen so enrolled, and providing himself with the arms, ammunition and accoutrements, required as aforesaid, shall hold the same exempted from all suits, distresses, executions or sales, for debt or for the payment of taxes.
Militia members were instructed to provide themselves with a good musket or rifle, 20-24 rounds of ammunition, bayonet, backpack and a pouch to hold the ammo. This translates, by my rough estimates, to about 10 minutes worth of ammo. In today's world, that would probably require you to show up with 60 rounds in magazines and at least 140 rounds in a bandolier. I could live with that.
Section IV:
...The officers to be armed with a sword or hanger, a fusee, bayonet and belt, with a cartridge box to contain twelve cartridges; and each private of matoss shall furnish themselves with good horses of at least fourteen hands and an half high, and to be armed with a sword and pair of pistols, the holsters of which to be covered with bearskin caps. Each dragoon to furnish himself with a serviceable horse, at least fourteen hands and an half high, a good saddle, bridle, mail-pillion and valise, holster, and a best [sic] plate and crupper, a pair of boots and spurs; a pair of pistols, a sabre, and a cartouchbox to contain twelve cartridges for pistols.
This is to point out that the Milita Act
requires pistols of some members, thus the anti-gun argument that handguns are not "militia arms" or "commonly in use by the military" (for combat) is completely void and without merit.
As to artillery and ordinance, the Militia Act specifies the formation of a company of Artillery;
That out of the militia enrolled as is herein directed, there shall be formed for each battalion, as least one company of grenadiers, light infantry or riflemen; and that each division there shall be, at least, one company of artillery, and one troop of horse:
So we see references to the use of "grenadiers" -- grenade throwers -- and a company of artillery. Yet nowhere in the act does it mention the militia members being responsible to provide their own artillery or grenades. Nor does it specify that the State or Federal government will provide such equipment. My best educated guess is, that the expense of these items was (and is) too much of a financial burden for a single militia member and that the state or federal authorities would make provisions (however meager) for them.
It is from the above requirements that I get my own personal viewpoint of what constitutes a "militia arm". To redefine it in modern terms, it would be any
firearm that can be carried afield by the average fit soldier along with 120 rounds of ammunition without assistance.
I don't know too many soldiers short of special forces guys who could (or would) carry a 20mm into the field. A fit man could likely carry a Barrett .50BMG and ammo though. I've known only about 5 men in my life who have carried an M2 (.50 cal BMG) into the field, most of them very large. But even then, the ammo carrier had the tripod on
his back.
And...getting away from firearms for the moment, "arms" also specifically includes edged weapons in the form of a sword, sabre or bayonet. We can surmise that smaller knives and cutting weapons were also carried for those bloody hand-to-hand engagements. It also includes "body armor" as the Dragoons were to provide themselves a "breast plate" for protection.
What are the odds this kid will be in jail by the time he is 18?