As I said, it would require that you include the concept of reasonableness, which is incorporated by courts in their analysis of constitutional and statutory language.
"When a law is clear and unambiguous and its application does not lead to absurd consequences, the law shall be applied as written and no further interpretatin may be made in search of the intent of the legislature."
If you don't recognize that your interpretation would lead to absurd consequences, well, then you must be a Ron Paul supporter.
As far as the artillery example, yes there was privately owned naval artillery on privateers, fighting the declared enemies of the national government. And on forts and riverboats to fight Indians. If you can't distinguish betweeen such things and nukes, anthrax and Apaches, well, like I said....
Those who had private naval artillery for their own purposes and used it were called pirates, and hanged.
