Lets steer this discussion to the here and now.
What constitutional grounds can we argue for arming ourselves in present day?
The conditions in which we find ourselves: protection of oneself and property, hunting and sport.
The tyrannical government argument, however true, won't wash with the antis. The militia argument won't fly either. Flying either one of those flags is not going to help our cause, might as well go turn in the guns now.
Okay give up if you want to but 500 dead from gunshot wounds in Chicago where in spite of the last supreme court cases its still very difficult for a law abiding citizen to get a gun and it can be taken from him under the slightest pretext. Outlaws and tyrannical government.
New Orleans, looters shooting at rescue helicopters and the police with the assistance of a few ignorant national guard units response is to beat up law abiding people in their home and confiscate their guns or to disarm citizens as they attempted to evacuate New Orleans. You would have cheerfully given up your guns to the racist black mayor and his corrupt police force, congratulations? Why don't you change your name to Baa, Baa in keeping with your philosophy.
My constitution says my rights to bear arms shall not be infringed. What part of that are you having trouble comprehending. I introduced you to the Federalist papers to give you an idea of exactly what the founding fathers meant by the bill of rights as a whole and the second amendment in particular and you just dismiss them as being out dated and irrelevant. It's bone headed attitudes like that which gives the anti-gunners their strength. When gun owners don;t stand squarely shoulder to shoulder but are willing to dissemble and compromise and equivocate you are in the enemies camp and not on the side of free Americans who would cherish their freedom and do what it takes to stay free.