I just got finished telling you "when that person is acting as a member of the state Militia". Not on their own.
Is there something wrong with you? Seriously.
One name. Just one. Out of three hundred million people, you should be able to come up with ONE PERSON who is exercising their 2nd Amendment right to standard common modern military arms (in the USA, that’s the M4). Yes, that includes anyone acting “as a member of the state militia”. Fine. Name one, just one, who owns a post-’86 machinegun, keeps it at home, not acting as an agent of the state (feds included).
Go ahead.
Name one.
Just one.
You seem to be stating that the Milita member, when called up, must report to the Militia Armory to be issued his Militia-owned weapon.
Classically, militia members were responsible for providing their own weapon and ammunition.
Thus, any militia member should be able to go down to the local Cabela's and buy their own weapon conforming to the requirements of said militia.
Then they're acting as an agent of the state - carrying out delegated powers on behalf of the state, and have no rights. They are selected by the government, they do and wield what their commanding officers tell them to, and act purely in the interest of the state. They keep and bear arms on behalf of the state, not on behalf of themselves. They exercise a delegated power; they do not, as such, have rights - even the 2nd Amendment.