Notwithstanding what Thomas and Scalia might tell you, here are two important facts about gun ownership in the late 18th century:
- Individual gun ownership was uncommon, because guns were not mass produced, and were expensive. Guns did not proliferate in America until after the Civil War.
- There was a very good reason the Second Amendment references the militia; the Anti-Federalists were worried that a standing army in the hands of a more powerful central government would be an instrument of tyranny. Their theory was that the Revolution had been won by individual state militias, not Washington and the Continental Army. The Second Amendment was primarily an attempt to reassure them on that point, not a statement about the right of self-defense.
In light of that, do you really think any of the FFs would support the private ownership of AR-15s? I suspect not.