Fully automatic guns maybe not, but the founding fathers definitely knew about repeating firearms, they had more than a few offers to purchase them, both for military uses and as private citizens. They just denied to because it was expensive to purchase and maintain.

▲

camgunz 2 days ago | parent [-]

No. While originalists and textualists purport to refuse to extend any principle into the modern day ("no right to privacy in 3A, 4A, etc"), one they do is that 2A doesn't merely apply to arms of the day, but also to modern arms. It's... pretty blatant.

	▲	anamax a day ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Electric presses seem to be covered by the 1st amendment, and there's a much bigger "output" difference between electric presses and manual presses than there is between machine guns and flintlocks. (Not to mention that flintlocks weren't the most sophisticated personal firearms in the 1770s, just the most common.)
	▲	anon373839 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Trump v. United States tells you everything you need to know about the jurists who claim to follow those doctrines. There isn’t a shred of originalism or textualism supporting it.