The Left is trying to use the "historical precedence" argument to their favor claiming there were no semiautomatic guns when the 2nd amendment was created. I think it's a very weak argument but every weak argument can become the strong truth if told enough to the right people.
Not this one. SCOTUS definitively dismissed this argument in
Heller:
Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment. We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications,... and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, ... the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding. DC v Heller, page 8 When SCOTUS calls an argument "bordering on the frivolous" it's a polite way of saying it's idiotic. Which it is.
-------------
Some seem to think that the left is acknowledging that "assault weapons" are just semiautomatics.
What's really happening is that the left is redefining semiautomatics as "assault weapons".
