Original intent matters. At the time the second amendment was written “well regulated” had nothing to do with government regulation, and everything to do with the people self-regulating.
“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.”
Pretty clear that citizens are allowed to own weapons so that if necessary, a state would have a well regulated militia. The comma in the middle of the amendment serves a purpose (not just a pause).
Second, none of the mass shooting were done with fully automatic weapons. I am guessing you do not know the difference between fully automatic and semi automatic.
I love how when there is a snow storm that causes a global warming convention to be cancelled, that is just weather and you cannot use that one storm as proof of no global warming (happened more than once). Then the same people say that this one storm in the Philippines is proof that global warming is severe. Hypocrisy at its best.
First, it does not matter what type of weapon was around when the second amendment was written. The founders were smart and did not specifically name a type of arms. Second, in order for a person to legally own a gun, that could kill 1000 people in 30 to 60 seconds, they would need to be able to pull the trigger 1000 times and reload at least ten times (assuming a 100 round clip). Automatic weapons are already illegal. Do some research.
+1