I would like to explain something about the 2nd amendment and the argument that it only applies to the militia. This argument is moot and for a reason almost no one ever explains.
Simply put it doesn't matter what the founders used to justify the right, only what right was recognized and protected under legal language of the constitution which is a binding legal contract between the State and the people.
Bluntly if the second amendment said,
"To protect the nation from the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed".
It would not lessen the protection of the right legally protected by the amendment which again is a binding legal document between the State and the people. There are two parts, the why and the what, there is no how, or limitation placed upon the right.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
Is the legally binding component in the document.
There is no other place where anyone questions who "the people" are is there? Zero. The phrase is used 10 times in the constitution including all amendments. In nine other usages the meaning of the phrase has never been legally challenged successfully and is accepted to mean simply, (all of the people).
Yes at one time that did not include slaves etc and that was wrong, that was also corrected by the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments, and those amendments did not, nor did any other amendment ever change what the term "the people" meant in the document. It is not legal for the same phrase to mean different things in the same legal contract.
Next the phrase "shall not" in legal language is absolute and binding in any and all legal contracts, and has never been questioned as to its meaning. This is a common legal term and it means exactly what it sounds like. This thing what ever it is will never be done unless the contract is amended by agreed upon means.
So one more time, if the 2nd Amendment said,
"Because there may some day be a rabbit that cannot even be killed with the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
The legal protections of the 2nd would be no different. Again one is justification, the other is a binding contract with THE PEOPLE. There is no other option and SCOTUS has ruled as such.
For more uncommon wisdom, go check out Jack Spirko, he runs The Survival Podcast. And it’s awesome.