Following the DC v. Heller Supreme Court ruling confirming that civilian ownership of “commonly used firearms” is constitutionally protected, control activists have been flailing in their efforts to maneuver around that new reality. One of the more common claims made by gun control activists is that “the Second Amendment only really applies to muskets.” The logic here (if that’s what you call it) is that muskets were the only firearms technology in common use at the time the Second Amendment was written, so therefore those should be the only weapons permitted.
That’s a more logically consistent argument than the ones that most gun control activists come up with when they make that claim, but such is life. Publications from OZY to Truth Revolt to the Washington Post have made the claim again and again that the Second Amendment only applies to muskets, which are perfectly fine to own and should be “protected” by the Second Amendment.
Until the gun control groups themselves come out and demand that muskets need to be banned too.
A few days ago the gun control organization known as Giffords published a pamphlet outlining their wish list for new bans and regulations to be implemented in the near future. Number eight on the list: muzzle loaders. AKA muskets.
To their credit, they point out that the reason why they are worried about muskets is the recently announced muzzle loader silencer from SilencerCo. But the rest of the text wrings its hands just as much. They point out how muzzle loaders are exempt from the Brady background check law and federal firearms regulations, which means dangerous people can buy them.
They make the case that muskets need to be regulated. That our right to keep and bear those antique and ancient firearms needs to be infringed, too. So when they say that “the Second Amendment only applies to muskets” it looks like they don’t even really believe that either.