I made that point as well, but unfortunately he interpreted it completely differently than I had intended.
He believes the 2A refers to muzzle loading muskets. The "Debate" degraded, on his side at least, or so I believe, to him cherry picking parts of my replies and him refuting them with twisted information on top of the omission of other replies that I had provided.
What was interesting, when I requested him to give me a valid explaination to why cities such as Phoenix and Chicago have such drastically different crime rates. He completely omitted this question and avoided the answer.
I also asked why he would choose to become a victim instead of defending himself, he said it was to avoid getting shot. He stated that
"Statistically most fatal shootings involving a home invader involve individuals who tried to defend their place of residence, so by not confronting the invader, you are less likely to get shot"
Quite frankly, this completely baffles me, since if the invader was willing to shoot you when you tried to defend your home, what's stopping him/her from shooting you even if you didn't? It makes no sense to me.