[tet68]

But since the Founders considered a well regulate Militia (rather than an armed populace) necessary to the security of a free state, they decided to be a little more specific.

If that was the case then they should have written it as,
“....,the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

We are speaking here of a “...Right of the PEOPLE...”, those same PEOPLE mentioned in the other amendments as indicating an individual right.

[robertpaulsen]

"If that was the case then they should have written it as, “....,the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

I'm not sure about "a Militia" having rights. They could have written, "the right of the people as members of a Militia to keep and bear ..." but that would have been redundant.

Speaking of "should have written", it they meant an individual right independent of a Militia, they should have written the second amendment as, "The right of citizens to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by Congress nor any state".

Lots of things they should have done, huh?