This argument is a conclusion by subtraction, if not the Fed government, then it must be the states.
But again it muddies the purpose of the bill of rights serving to protect the individual citizens rights.
What did the founders mean by arms? They didn't mean today’s weapons!
Also calling this the LIBSHIT argument(& in order to even make the argument u have to ignore the usefulness of citizen protection from tyranny which the founders believed)
Well using MW somehow the definition of it as a weapon happens to be missing as a noun. Almost intentionally to support the LIBSHIT ARMS ARGUMENT
Maybe the thesaurus would help, well its there! but not after listing smaller guns!
& those R supposed to transcend time?
Yet the courts debate the semantics of a 2018 definition's 1787 relevance
U DON’T GET MUCH MORE 1984 than that!
and its definition of arms almost exclusively dealt with weaponry.
Arms is the wepon's ability to offer both offense and defensive damage through whatever extension available.
So regarding #2a ARMS is whatever is the most effective extension of the person not limited to size, or potency.
FOUNDERS would argue equal arms for all.
GOVERNMENTS UPPED THE ANTE in their development of weapons and we shouldn't care?
WHY BECAUSE THEY ARE TRUST WORTHY!
So How could we feel safe?
& the arms that have been created BY GOVERNMENT have the ability to destroy the world with a push of a button.
So start ridding the world of those before u take our rights! #wethepeople
The ARMS of #wethepeople should @ the very least be equal in strength to the overreaching arms of our GOV the reason those rights were created
it does appear in th 1828 Websters dictionary
and certainly, they were aware of previous variations of arms most likely the source of the word armada