This analysis does not intend to imply that a citizen does not possess an inherent right to self-defense.
“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.”
The meaning of this amendment has been argued at ad infinitum.
Allow us to assume that this amendment reads:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
That would appear to be crystal clear, but why would an amendment be necessary to state the obvious, since anyone who wanted arms had arms?
The actual amendment appears to become clarified when we add: “A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”.
That appears to define, with specificity, the meaning, i.e., the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed is due to the necessity of being able to call citizens, when and if necessary, to form a well-regulated militia for the purpose of augmenting the standing army for the ultimate purpose of the defense of the nation.
When citizens would be called to serve in a well-regulated militia, it was necessary that they bring arms, thus no authority should be able to deny the possession of the requisite arms.
DISCUSSION: James Madison and Alexander Hamilton were involved in discussions as to whether to have a large standing army or a small one which could be supplemented by a call-up of citizens.
Since we were a growing nation and needed farmers, builders, etc., they opted for a smaller cadre military.
It appears that the conclusion was that the organized militia (the army) could augment its forces if and when required.
It is, further, probable that the State National Guard system and the military’s reserve system is the metamorphosis of the intended, but out-dated, “well-regulated militia”.
Thus, it appears that there is no possible phenomenon as a “well-regulated militia” or any possibility thereof, in the United States of America.
CONCLUSION: It appears the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution does not imply an inherent right for an individual to keep and bear arms for any purpose other than to be able to participate in a “well-regulated militia”.
Furthermore, since the “well-regulated militia” has been subjugated by the ORGANIZED militia, this amendment is without significance, i.e., has no meaning or consequence.
ADDITIONALLY: This analysis does not intend to imply that a citizen does not possess an inherent right to self-defense.
This analysis is being presented for the sole purpose to reflect that the intent and basis for the 2nd Amendment have been eliminated, thus the functionality of this amendment has been eliminated and cannot and must not be relied upon to build any legal edifice upon that defective foundation.
Again, when our nation was in its youth, the 2nd Amendment was necessary and functional for the security of free State.