<https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FOwy9OWfnAM>
As I noted elsewhere, all the fretting over the meaning of “A well regulated militia” within the Second Amendment is actually of no consequence as far as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (RKBA) is concerned. The “collective right” advocates are finding in the Second Amendment a restriction that does not exist. It is politically motivated ignorance of grammar and long discredited.
Some notes:
The Constitution does not confer a Right to Keep and Bear Arms. If the Second Amendment did not exist, the People would still have a Right to Keep and Bear Arms preserved by the Ninth Amendment, there being no explicit power granted to FedGov to infringe that right.
The militia consisted of men who kept their own military-grade arms and who were expected to bring those arms when the militia was mustered.
Remember those old “Regulator” clocks? Well Regulated meant in good working order, accurate. “Well regulated” was in common use and as applied to the Constitution, “well regulated” referred to being competent with their weapons, hence it was expected that citizens would practice their marksmanship and be proficient when called upon to serve. Keeping and bearing arms is pretty much a requirement to practice with those arms.
All the concern over the meaning of “A well regulated militia” is letting the tail wag the dog. The first thirteen words are purely explanatory and neither add nor subtract or restrict what follows: that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
“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.”
Imagine the First Amendment if it too had an explanatory clause. It might read: “A well informed electorate being necessary to wisely chuse its leaders, Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; …”
Would the usual idjits claim that freedom of speech or of the press belonged only to the “well informed”?
The Second Amendment could as well read: “Because guns are fun to shoot, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In terms of what the Second Amendment means about RKBA, the “guns are fun” version is equal to the original – the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. At least in theory.
Now we need to work on “infringed.”