It's a constitutionally recognized inalienable right. Try taxing every social media post and news paper article and see how that goes.
> The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose.
~ Thomas Cooley 1898 https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1645290273902305280
> The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people.
~ William Rawle 1825 https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1645290263299117056
> Mr. Eliot, of Massachusetts, who had charge of the bill in the House, moved an amendment to the seventh section by inserting as one of the rights to which negroes were entitled "the constitutional right to bear arms." Since the House adopted this amendment, which was also concurred in by the Senate, it is evident that the right to bear arms was regarded as one of the rights pertaining to citizens, and as this right is secured by the Second Amendment, it may reasonably be inferred that the other rights and privileges secured or enumerated by the first eight Amendments were also regarded as belonging to all persons.
> Horace Edgar Flack 1908 ~ The Adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1645290276993527810
> The right of the people to keep and bear arms. object of this clause is to secure a well-armed militia. It has always been the policy of free governments to dispense, as far as possible, with standing armies, and to rely for their defence, both against foreign invasion and domestic turbulence, upon the militia. Regular armies have always been associated with despotism. But a militia would be useless unless the citizens were enabled to exercise themselves in the use of warlike weapons. To preserve this privilege, and to secure to the people the ability to oppose themselves in military force against the usurpations of government, as well as against enemies from without, that government is forbidden by any law or proceeding to invade or destroy the right to keep and bear arms.
~ John Norton Pomeroy 1868 https://twitter.com/MorosKostas/status/1645290278520254464
These are a few excerpts from this longer thread https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1645290263299117056
You're just picking out the bits you like.
In what way are you not free to buy guns, ammo, &c when there is a tax on them?
Are you saying convicted (and possibly violent) felons should be able to buy guns?
You mean, before Bruen the court acted like that first clause of the 2A was more than just flavor text.
I refer you to this thread[1] of dozens of sources that show the only pre-20th century view is the individual right view consistent with Heller, McDonald, and Bruen.