Oh, you can call ME "perverted" but sniff that I should not be "vulgar" hilarious.
Militias were drilled under regulations they were not applied merely when they were in the field.
Now you are really getting mendacious and are creating arguments you can argue with yourself about such as claiming that I said the Second was intended to disarm the people.
Volunteer militia's were only called up when the need was there. There was no regular drill for them. Nor did the Militia Act of 1792 impose one.
Your statement was that even though there is a Constitutional Amendment as the "Supreme Law of the Land", the States are free to infringe on said Rights and that you have several infringements you approve of. No need to lie about what you said or that I repeated from your exact words.
Nice try at lying about MY words though. Better luck next time.
"Well regulated"
http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndmea.html
This leaves us with "to adjust to some standard..." or "to put in good order." Let's let Alexander Hamilton explain what is meant by well regulated in Federalist Paper No. 29:
The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, nor a week nor even a month, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry and of the other classes of the citizens to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people and a serious public inconvenience and loss.
--- See The Federalist Papers, No. 29.
"To put in good order" is the correct interpretation of well regulated, signifying a well disciplined, trained, and functioning militia.