He is just wrong. The founders had very little discussion about "hunting birds" but lots of discussion about keeping the citizenry armed to protect themselves against government.
The constitution says nothing about anyone in government having any right to decide why a law abiding citizen wants a gun. The citizen can have one just because he wants it.
Period.
If that moron can even read, I'll bet that he'd be shocked out of his socks to see what Madison wrote in Federalist #46. To conclude that the same people who had (less than 10 years before) just completed a vicious and bloody revolt against the most powerful central government in the world (which began, BTW, with an effort by that same powerful central government to implement gun control at Lexington and Concord), would waste any ink on modifying the most precious document in American history to protect the "right" to hunt is the most shallow, ill-considered, uninformed, anti-American opinion that one could imagine. Which explains why so many anti-gunners hold exactly that view.
It should also be interesting to see whether the USSC has the cojones to take on the Silveira case. A constitutionally proper decision there would nullify every gun control law on the books.