
The reason we have the right to bear arms is actually intended to prevent the establishment of an armed nobility like they had in Europe. In many European countries, only nobles (and eventually soldiers) were allowed to legally own and use weapons. That was one of the big reasons feudalism was as bad as it was: Nobles could use force with impunity on people who couldn’t legally defend themselves.
OP's is critiquing the circular authority behind our constitution: our "rights" are just whatever the winners wrote down after winning. Colonists didn't take this land with muskets alone. Smallpox and other European diseases killed huge numbers of Native people, often before any fighting started, and at Fort Pitt in 1763 the British tried to spread it on purpose. Disease did more of the conquering than guns did, yet nobody calls it a sacred right. So why treat the musket like one?