"[T]he right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited."

I note it's time for a refresher.

Some limitation on the types of arms protected by the second amendment is 
clearly within the scope of the amendment. Mr. Justice Scalia in the Heller 
decision:

    There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and
    history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right
    to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was *not unlimited*,
    just as the First Amendment ’s right of free speech was not, see,
    e.g., United States v. Williams, 553 U. S. ___ (2008). Thus, we
    do not read the Second Amendment to protect the right of citizens
    to carry arms for any sort of confrontation, just as we do not
    read the First Amendment to protect the right of citizens to
    speak for any purpose.
    [...]
    Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is
    *not unlimited*. From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases,
    commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was
    not a right to keep and carry *any weapon whatsoever* in any
    manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.
    [emphasis added]

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html


Gun fondlers may think the right *ought* to be unlimited, but as a matter of 
text, history and interpretation, it is not. That is simply a fact, and crazed 
far-right gun crackpots, such as scooter and Francis Mark Hansen, are going to 
have to accommodate themselves to that fact. You do not have a right to just 
whatever guns you wish to have.

-- 
Gun fondlers are fearful, weak and insecure.