No strawmen at all. If we all accept- as I assume even you accept- the people don't have the right to own every weapon that exists, including nuclear weapons, than that proves that the Second Amendment was never absolute and that there is no obligation to oppose any limitations on the the types of weaponry people can personally own just to prove they support "gun rights". And in any case, the NRA also admitted the Second Amendment isn't absolute by not opposing a ban on "bump stocks" and would not have accepted the president they helped elect actually going ahead AND banning them.

And in reality, you know perfectly well that no U.S. president would ever actually try having the military go door to door confiscating personal weapons- whoever had the job would realize that trying such a thing would cause massive armed right-wing uprising and that in whole regions of the country most of the troops would refuse to participate in it both out of sympathy to gun owners-some of whom are their relatives- and out of a perfectly understandable wish not to be gunned-down by civilians on the U.S. territory.