And rifle.
1. The people who wrote the Constitution had no problem with people keeping those guns.
2. Wasn't the flintlock musket also standard issue for the military? That and the rifle. So if it was OK for people back then to own "military style" weapons, why isn't it now?
3. A $200 fee to own a rifle? Sounds like a poll tax. Maybe a black person who wants to own an AR15 should ask if it is...
1. The people who wrote the Constitution were familiar with the essentials of what is a short step to modern firearms. George Washington saw a sales pitch for, and turned down only because of manufacturing limitations, demonstration of the Puckle Gun (basically a machinegun). Thomas Jefferson personally gave Lewis & Clark the equivalent of a 22-shot semiautomatic .45 caliber rifle.
2. Militia Act of 1792 obligated all draft-suitable citizens equip themselves with rifles etc equivalent to what any soldier would have, or meet, on the battlefield. Today that would be a suppressed M4 with 1 case of ammo.
3. I’m more concerned about 922(o) completely prohibiting any ownership of modern standard-issue military arms period. I’ve ponied up the $400 for a suppressed semi-auto M4 SBR, but that the feds would jail me having an actual M4 should be more concerning to everyone.