Child-shredder, then, because that’s the effect it had on those 10 year olds in Uvalde.

We can call the cops "Child-shredder protectors" as well, as the only shooting they prevented that day was one of the officers going in after his wife, who was killed. They didn't even try to open the door to the classroom, just stood around and made damn sure that nobody else did anything.

You want to disarm yourself in light of that news?

Appeal to emotion is not a valid argument.

How was that an emotional argument? I was just stating the effect the weapon had on a bunch of those kids, not how awesome the weapon looked, or how powerful I feel owning one.

Do you "feel" that's incorrect then?

How about "semi-automatic" then?

The amendment uses the word "arms" which includes every time of fire arm. It doesn't say "keep and bear muskets" just as much as it doesn't say "keep and bear semi-automatics".

This line of reasoning has to explain how we can regulate things like:

- Javelin missile launchers

- aerosolized bioagents

- jet fighters

- land mines

but not sniper rifles.

Again, if you're going to extrapolate what "arms" meant in the late 18th century, you have some choices:

- personal arms of the day (muskets, cannons, bayonets)

- personal arms of the current day (missile launchers [0])

- weirdo arms of the current day (drones, gases and bioagents, dirty bombs, white phosphorous)

Originalism isn't helpful to us here, it turns out.

[0]: https://www.militaryfactory.com/smallarms/rocket-launchers.p...

> The amendment uses the word "arms" which includes every time of fire arm.

Can you buy Carl Gustaf 8.4 cm recoilless rifle? M114 155 mm howitzer? Mortars? They are all firearms.

I mean if you're going to be pedantic, what about "well regulated militia"?

Maybe every US citizen is the militia. Part of the point of the 2nd amendment is that the citizens have the power to hold the government accountable, both at the ballot box and the ammo box.