Not at all. I read that as, "The right of the citizens to bear arms in battle in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."
You're making exactly the same mistake that DC is in Heller.
If they don't have those arms before battle, they won't have them in battle.
Your limitations would be fulfilled to your apparent satisfaction by the opening depiction in "Enemy at the Gates": men shipped to the front lines, handed 5 rounds just before engaging in combat, and told to go find a rifle somewhere. Why yes indeed, nobody is going to question their "right" to pick a rifle off a fallen comrade and use it in combat.
Better that every citizen be given plenty of time during peace to acquire arms and become familiar with them, lest their service be abruptly needed but the state unable to arm & train them in short order. You know, something added to the Constitution like "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". I could be drafted; if I am, I have reason to believe they'll have few arms left by then to supply draftees ... better that I show up with my M4LE in good condition and familiar therewith, rather than hope someone might have something to give me.
Your premise amounts to "RKBA by welfare state": the state decides who gets what arms when. That is anathema to the Founding Fathers, who sought a state that would facilitate strong self-sufficient free individuals.
ROFLMAO! The words "in battle" do not appear in those state Constitutional provisions, they are a figment of your imagination or something.
I'd say nice try, but it was pretty lame really.