That’s close to how it is in Switzerland. The main difference is that not only is every man required to have a rifle, but younger guys are provided with an automatic, not semiautomatic, military rifle. That country has a very low homicide rate and has not been invaded in many centuries.
We used to be like that here in the US, except with a higher homicide rate.
The point being, the definition of a Militia is that it is the whole of the people. That's why I can't understand why anyone would take that route for 2A issues.
It doesn't make any sense unless they just want to lose. There are lots of early American militia acts where every able-bodied male is required to keep on-hand a rifle and a number of cartridges for Militia duty.
Since that was the intent of the Amendment, it seems to me that a good lawyer could argue that successfully and eliminate that as an argument permanently and enshrine a second Right Of The People with regard to 2A.
I get into this with liberals all the time and point out to them the Militia statutes of their own States. Each State has Militia laws on the books. Some for an infantry militia - some also include a naval militia. But each and every US State has those laws on the books, even Hawaii, California, New York, and MA.
It causes them to twist into knots when you say, "See! See! Your Governor can call you up and demand you furnish your own gun. You DO have a suitable Militia weapon, right?"