Debating the 2nd Amendment’s wording is another diversion when we consider its context: it is part of the Bill of Rights. Does anyone believe that when the Founders compiled their catalogue of inalienable rights (free speech, due process, protection against search and seizure, etc.) that they would, in just the second item, change the subject to conscripts’ military preparedness against foreign invaders? Such an interpretation is a laughable non sequitur.
It is clear that the 2nd Amendment was intended to function exactly as the rest of the Bill of Rights: protect the individual from the government.
Independent cities might also 'keep arms' ~ but only nobles had the Right to keep arms ~ whether the king agreed or not, and to bear them ~ against the king, or against other nobles, or against commoners, or against even churchmen or foreigners!
It was an unfettered right created thousands of years ago for the purpose of creating a ruling elite.
We The People are the ruling elite in America, and through the Bill of Rights we enobled every man, woman and child. We have all those ancient rights and privileges.
Sometimes you'll hear about the Founders expressing their 'rights as Englishmen' ~ and there they are. England, at that time was far more advanced than the other and lesser states in Europe ~ even commoners had rights there ~ not all the rights, but enough for them to prize them highly.
How clever of the Founders to hide that phrase in the Bill of Rights. He who has understanding may read those words and say 'I am the king around here ~ and my servants are unfaithful ~ dispose of them'.