What right? How does this situation differ at all from an agent of the state carrying out the powers of the state under state control? Surely the Founding Fathers didn't think soldiers needed legal protection to carry weapons!
This is the first mention of soldiers. I'm not talking about soldiers. I'm talking about members of a well regulated state militia.
Did you now want to change the topic?
Protection? The Founding Fathers wanted to protect the right of members of a well regulated state Militia to keep and bear arms from federal infringement.
You're now resorting to distorting the argument -- which is what you typically do. You're now talking about "soldiers" and "agents of the state" and "legal protection". I'm not going down that road. I think I've been very clear.