Why the 2nd Amendment does not mention muskets!

When one reads the Bill of Rights, one often sees that the Founding Fathers were extremely "vague" in their details.  They often talked in generalities rather than specifics.  And for good reason too!   They knew that the world was changing and changing FAST!  They knew that being too specific would lead to the downfall of the Bill of Rights because future lawmakers could argue that the "new" was not mentioned in the "old" Constitution and therefore was not applicable.

Take for example, the freedom of the press does not go into detail of the kind of "press" used for making the newspapers, or pamphlets.  It does not go into how the information is distributed whether its from a newspaper, a book, a magazine or even just a poster.  It just says :

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

 That is all.  No less.  No more.

Had they given MORE detail such as the use of a "metal fixed type manual printing press" then one would argue that other forms of information such as the internet, email, television, radio were not mentioned and therefore not legitimately covered by the Constitution and therefore must be "regulated".  They could argue that "Clearly the Founding Fathers never saw the day when every person could have access to the ability to send information to thousands of people at the same time over the internet". 

It is the same reason why the Founding Fathers made no mention of "muskets" in the Bill of Rights.  Instead all they wrote was:

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. 

That is all.  No less.  No more.

The lack of details was their genius in writing the Bill of Rights for had they mentioned "muskets", then newer guns like , rifles, pistols , semi-automatic and automatic guns could be regulated as well since they too do not meet the specific wording.  We would each be left with the right to own a single shot musket gun (most likely not rifled) similar to what the Revolutionary War soldiers used.  No less... No more.

Beware of those who argue that automatic rifles were not mentioned in the Constitution and therefore they MUST BE CONTROLLED for there are a lot of things not mentioned in the Constitution as well that they could use as an argument for controlling.

Here are just a few:
1) Websites  - Freedom of Speech
2) Email  - Freedom of the Press
3) Television/Radio - Freedom of the Press, Speech and Religion
4) Speaker and Amplifiers - Freedom of Speech
5) Twitter/Facebook - Freedom of Speech
6) Electronic Books - Freedom of the Press, Speech, Religion
7) Electronic Body Scanners - not mentioned in searches and seizures.
8) Drones - Freedom of Warrant-less Searches
9) Cars, Cell-phones, Computers - not mentioned when discussing searches and seizures. 

If you allow them to control the types of guns allowed under the 2nd Amendment, then you will also be opening up the door to arguments for limiting our Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Religion as well.

Like I always say:  Be careful what you ask for... you might just get MORE than you asked for.