The founders wanted an armed citizenry. Your failure to understand that explains your inconsistency in interpretation. Ask ultra-liberal lawyer Lawrence Tribe what the second amendment means. He will reluctantly tell you; an armed citizenry.
An armed citizenry was useless without training. And training everyone would be "as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution ... the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable."
"Ask ultra-liberal lawyer Lawrence Tribe what the second amendment means. He will reluctantly tell you; an armed citizenry."
Well, duh. What else would a well regulated Militia consist of, armed cows?
The Founders stated, clearly, in the second amendment that it was a well regulated Militia that was necessary to the security of a free State, not an armed citizenry.