the amendment itself is extremely broad and at the time it was written, merchants commonly used cannon barrages to fight pirates

of course it's a different world now, but if you think it should ban cannons you are misinterpreting it

I think if they wanted to allow any and all arms it would have stated so.

that's probably why they included the term "Shall not be infringed"

It said a right to bare arms, not any and all arms, a statement like "a right to bare arms shall not be infringed" means literally as long as some form of arms are provided the clause is met.

yes i agree the IAEA infringes the average US citizens right to bear nukes

I mean... I'm against wokeism and CRT and all that, but the "all men are created equal"-part was really interpreted in very suspect ways over American history, and teaching children about this history is important.

Fun fact: did you know that there was a time when the Supreme Court of the United States invoked the Fifth Amendment, specifically the passage "No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law", to reason a pro-slavery position?

The pure text of the Constitution is not enough to foster patriotism, it's how the words are filled with life. Neither the race-based caste system of the Jim Crow era nor the race-based caste system that the modern left wants to erect serve this purpose.

Well it would of stated that you can't bear certain arms also. It's just some people decide to interpret that in a limiting way.

rofl the $0.16 cents saved from last year..... Meanwhile everything else went up by 10-40% not to mention the inflation that will definitely hit everyone.
This just rubbing it in your face tweet.

They had no idea what kind of arms would emerge at that point in history, human history is one long arms race, they couldn't predict things like a tomahawk missile.