The Constitution says "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." Doesn't that imply that the arms the People should bear should be military equivalent in order to be a useful and well regulated militia?
I love it when anti-gun people try to say "Well, the 2nd Amendment was written when they only had single shot weapons, and it wasn't intended for today's modern weapons..." I tell them that they are right about the muzzle loaders - and that the founding fathers clearly intended that the PEOPLE should have the exact same weapons as the military. Then there are those who say "You don't need an assault rifle to hunt." Again, I tell them they are right about not needing an AR to hunt, but the 2nd Amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting. It is only concerned with fighting a tyrannical government.