Originalism is a legal philosophy that was poorly understood by its chief exponent, the late, great Justice Scalia, and so it stands to reason his proteges are no better at explaining it or understanding it.

It's not a deep dive into lexicography or the rules of grammar (in 1787 and 1789, the leading American grammar of the day was Wheelock's, and not Webster's, not yet published, which Scalia refers to speciously in Heller).

Put very simply, originalism philosophically is based upon the understanding that the ratification of the Constitution and its amendments, and those circumstances (debates, etc.) guide the meaning of the provisions.

So, when you don't refer to the ratification debates, votes, and conventions in your originalist analysis, it's not an orginalist analysis. Plain and simple.

So yes, under an originalist meaning, the 2nd Amendment means Congress can't stop you from owning the modern equivalent of a 12 pound gun. The states, on the other hand, can regulate the shit out of your 2nd Amendment rights.

Rightly or wrongly, originalism doesn't restore some libertarian past; it restores a state-government controlled life. That means a local-government controlled life.

The Constitution is a creature of the states. The local government is a creature of the state. Basically, we are living in a sort of mini-EU of 50 nation-states. That's originalism.