The second amendment to the U.S. Constitution says this:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is not about duck hunting. It is not about self-defense within one's home. From well-documented discussion and recorded debate; from indisputable history, the Second Amendment is about this:
The Second Amendment was proposed by James Madison to allow the creation of civilian forces that can counteract a tyrannical federal government.
Accordingly by my lights, weapons that are so-called assault weapons, specifically designed as deadly weapons to be used against others possessing similar weapons of deadly force, who may be promulgating tyranny and contravening the freedom of citizens, are precisely the sort of "Arms" that the Constitution protects. One does not effectively oppose tyranny by use of weaponry, so-called, that is designed for target practice, and/or hunting ducks and other wild game.
The "right to keep and bear arms" guaranteed by the Constitution, is specifically intended to make persons like Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) nervous as they heedlessly promulgate tyranny in legislation that assumes progressives in government know better what is good for people than do the people themselves.
What then, is to be done about the heart-breaking incidence of crazed persons in the grip of mental illness who apparently hate existence itself to the point of attacking the innocent and blameless children of our fair and beloved country? For a long time in my life, such things were so rare that I could put it down as part of the cost of being free--- Some children die in car accidents because irresponsible parents drive drunk or simply make careless errors in real time: not seeing that speeding car and pulling onto the highway. Some used to die of polio or rubella, or other diseases of childhood. Others die because it has become fashionable for madmen to attack schools, killing our future citizens at random. Children are so loved and so valued, that such foul attacks guarantee lifelong pain and mourning for the affected families and survivors. Our ability to ignore such atrocities as exceedingly rare is being overwhelmed.
There was once a principle of polity that said "Millions for defense, but not one penny for tribute!", encapsulating the idea that freedom is not freedom if it is held hostage to the force of some external entity, and must be purchased on time, continually. As lame as it may sound, I believe that we may need to spend huge money, specifically to harden our places of polity and good will gatherings, including schools and sports arenas, and suchlike. Spend millions for that, and for mental health assurances and enforcement of limited citizenry for those whose mental health is even remotely questionable and spend not one penny in contravening freedom by confiscating firearms. Limited citizenry would include (possibly temporary?) surrender of personal firearms, after certain parameters, such as being subscribed anti-depressant drugs, are noticed. One's right to vote is forfeit when one becomes a convicted felon-- why not one's right to personal firearms under more stringent restriction? But we would have to put real teeth in the law by the creation of a special enforcement agency (analogous to Homeland Security) with resources to operate at scale.
There are already laws on the books that are relevant, but of course such laws are un-enforced-- are unenforceable in fact, without much increased and different enforcement resources: There is no one (as of now) to show up at the home of a newly-convicted felon or a person recently released from a mental health facility or one just put on a mental-health leave of absence, with a warrant demanding that personal arms be checked into secure lockup at pain of felony offense for refusal, or avoidance, or denial, or concealment.
Routine "entrance by scanning" has made air travel much safer, with courtrooms, hospitals, and other places of special importance or special vulnerability similarly protected, right now. I believe that we must simply bite that bullet and pay the toll for wardens like unto Homeland Security, to similarly protect our children, and our schools. These things can be done, with little constitutional precedent to be set; with little more than the will of people to support reasonable laws, and with adequate funding for new administrative units like unto Homeland Security. By my (libertarian) leanings, the new bureaucracy to be created would be done state-by-state, by legislatures that would have access to federal tax support--
Taking away our precious"...right to keep and bear Arms..." by confiscating all AR-15's and other "assault weapons" is not an effective policy, to say nothing of the fact that it clearly violates the highest law of the land (our Constitution). Make no mistake, a disarmed and cowed citizenry is NOT free. Real, hard, actual, and even occasionally dangerous freedom is an essential aspect among the things that make our country great. Such freedom is a precious thing. A government whose solution is to trust no one but its own military, will ultimately receive less and less trust, good will, and participation from its people. Eventually that critical "consent of those governed" is forfeit, and government "of the people, by the people, and for the people" becomes a distant memory, with whatever is left having no legitimacy; justly held in contempt by those it governs by force alone.
One is reminded of the famous but now seldom-cited quote from our firebrand, radical founding father Patrick Henry:
"Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”