No. Contextomy fallacy.
Let's look at the entire 2nd amendment:
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.
This amendment discusses two inherent rights, both related:
The right of a State to defend itself, as a free State, simply because it is a State. States defend themselves through the use of an army (a militia). Like most armies, it is regulated by that State. They are run by that State, for the purpose of a State defending itself.
The right of an individual to defend himself. This is simply because he is a living, breathing, thing. All animals have the right to defend themselves, using whatever means to do so.
Nothing in the Constitution ever granted the federal government the right to restrict guns or any other weapon. If it's not in the Constitution, THEY CAN'T LEGALLY DO IT.
The 2nd amendment is a SPECIFIC prohibition and reiteration to the federal government: HANDS OFF.
The 2nd amendment is also binding upon the States. The States agreed to this when they formed the Constitution or when they joined the Union. No State can prevent someone from obtaining a gun. No government can take away the right of self defense. That includes self defense by ANY WEAPON.
There is no clause in the 2nd amendment listing type of weapon, type of action, style of weapon, any brand name, number of cartridges in a magazine, size or type of ammunition, etc. The government is specially prevented from infringing on anything related to self defense, or the weapons used so, or the armies (or militia) used so.
