Gee, isn't this what I have said all along and even been chastised HERE for pointing out?
Right to Bear (Some) Arms
The “civilized-warfare” test excludes firearms that many persons
want to be included.
By Dave Kopel
[url]www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel060701.shtml[/url]
[EXCERPT]
"Attorney Stephen Halbrook, suggests that, "artillery pieces,
tanks, nuclear devices and other heavy ordinances are not
constitutionally protected" arms, nor are "grenades, bombs,
bazookas and other devices … which have never been
commonly possessed for self-defense." (Steven Halbrook,
What the Framers Intended: A Linguistic Interpretation
of the Second Amendment, 49 L. & CONTEMP. PROB. at
153 (1986).)
But the Halbrook test sidesteps the fact that militia uses, not
just personal-defense uses, are part of the core of the Second
Amendment. Moreover, the Halbrook test could allow
governments to ban new types of guns or weapons, since
those weapons, being new, "have never been commonly
possessed for self-defense." The test could allow Second
Amendment technology to be frozen, as if the government
claimed that new communications devices are unprotected by
the First Amendment because they have never (heretofore)
been commonly used for speech."