🔒 A Constitutional Argument:

Why All Individually Wieldable Military Arms Must Be Legal Under the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment states:

“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

This guarantee is not conditional. It does not expire, and it does not grant rights selectively based on wealth, military affiliation, or government approval. At its core, the Second Amendment affirms that the American people have the right to possess and carry arms suitable for their defense — individually, collectively, and against all threats, foreign or domestic.

🔹 1. Historical Foundation

At the time of the Founding, citizens were expected to provide their own arms for militia service. These weapons were not “hunting arms” or watered-down civilian alternatives — they were military arms, commonly equal to those used by professional soldiers. Citizens owned:

• Muskets, rifles, bayonets, and swords

• Cannons and warships, in the case of privateers

• Repeaters and high-capacity arms like the Puckle Gun

There was no law barring the ownership of arms based on their military purpose or capability. On the contrary, the expectation was that civilian and military arms were one and the same.

🔹 2. Legal Precedent: Bearable Military Arms Are Protected

Under recent Supreme Court rulings, the Second Amendment has been reaffirmed as an individual right that cannot be limited by arbitrary or modern policy arguments.

🧷 District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)

• Protected arms “in common use” for lawful purposes, including self-defense.

• Emphasized that the right extends to weapons bearable by individuals.

⚖️ Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)

• Held that “unusual” weapons bans violate the Second Amendment.

• Affirmed that modern arms are protected, even if they weren’t around in 1791.

📜 NYSRPA v. Bruen (2022)

• Set a new standard: All gun regulations must be consistent with text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment — as it was understood in 1791.

• Rejected modern "interest-balancing" (like safety vs. rights).

✅ Together, these cases make clear: Any bearable, military-grade arm — like an M4, M240, M249, RPK, or service pistol — is constitutionally protected.

🔹 3. Arbitrary Bans Are Unconstitutional

Current federal law creates artificial, unconstitutional restrictions:

• The Hughes Amendment (1986) prohibits civilians from owning any machine gun made after May 19, 1986.

• The National Firearms Act (1934) imposes extreme burdens and selective bans on weapons classified as “destructive devices.”

• These laws allow only the wealthy elite to access certain weapons — creating a class-based system of rights.

A constitutional right that only the rich can exercise is not a right — it is a privilege.

There is no legitimate constitutional justification for banning a newer model of a weapon simply because of its date of manufacture or its military pedigree. That would be like saying your free speech depends on how expensive your microphone is, or how old your printing press might be.

🔹 4. Wieldable Arms Are the Constitutional Line

The Founders understood that the line between a militia and an army was often one of numbers and uniforms — not weapons. Today’s equivalent arms are those used by individual soldiers and wieldable by one person. This includes:

• Rifles (semi-auto and full-auto)

• Light machine guns (e.g. M249, RPK)

• Sidearms

• Shotguns

• Ammunition types including armor-piercing (AP), unless strictly explosive

These arms are:

• Bearable

• Effective for personal and collective defense

• Rooted in historical use by militias and free citizens

Any effort to ban, register, restrict, or delay access to these arms is an infringement of the Second Amendment — and cannot survive scrutiny under Bruen.

🧠 Conclusion: The Standard is Clear

If a weapon is wieldable by an individual soldier, it should be legal for a free citizen.

This isn’t about extremism — it’s about equality under the law and honoring the original meaning of the Constitution. A government that fears the people owning the same weapons it arms its soldiers with is not a government founded on liberty — it’s a government drifting toward tyranny.

It’s time to restore the Second Amendment as written, as intended, and as owed to every American — not just the privileged few.