militia - Regardless of what anyone says, the National Guard is NOT "the militia". In fact the National Guard was not created until 1916, over 125 year after the Constitution was ratified. The Constitution specifically gives Congress the power to call up the militia for various purposes. Merriam Webster defines it as: a : a part of the organized armed forces of a country liable to call only in emergency
The militia was called to quell the riot.
b : a body of citizens organized for military service 2 : the whole body of able-bodied male citizens declared by law as being subject to call to military service
The Militia Act of 1792 defines it as: each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside....
It was revised and replace in 1903 which expanded the definition by leaving out the "white male" requirement and dividing the militia into two groups, the organized militia comprised of the National Guard and the naval Militia, and the unorganized militia, which means virtually everyone else.
being necessary to the security of a free State - Not the individual states, but the country as a whole DEPENDS on the armed population to defend it against tyranny and oppression. Note: it says nothing about hunting or shooting clays.
the right - A right is RECOGNIZED by the Constitution as being granted by God. It is not subject to vote by the majority and even if the 2nd Amendment were repealed, THE RIGHT WOULD STILL EXIST!
of the people - Every time "the people" is mentioned in the Constitution, it means "the individual". The writers of the Constitution weren't just being sloppy and accidentally used "the people" when they really meant "the state".
to keep - To possess firearms that are suitable for service in the militia. In US vs, Miller 1939, the Supreme Court ruled that arms suitable for use in the militia were specifically protected by the 2nd Amendment and that Miller's sawed off single shot shotgun was unsuitable for militia duty. In 1939 they didn't have the AR15, but machine guns and semi automatic firearms had been around for over 40 years. This right included ammunition as the militia was expected to show up with ammunition for their firearm.
and bear Arms - To carry in public without fear of harassment.
shall not be infringed - The encroachment, breach, or violation of a right, law, regulation, or contract. Does telling people they have to jump through hoops and ask permission from the government and restrict when and where and what type of gun you can have encroach on the 2nd Amendment? If you think it doesn't, how ridiculous would you sound if you claimed that EVERY publicly posted memo or sentence or news story had to be approved by a government official?
Finally, if you think that the AR-15 isn't covered by the 2nd Amendment, close your computer, get out a quill and ink and write me a letter explaining your position. Then give the letter to a man on a horse and have him deliver it to me. THEN we'll have a nice discussion about why you are wrong.
The National Guards formation predates the constitution by 150 years. The Militia was organized into regiments in 1636 by the colony of Massachusetts, Those three regiments still exist today in Massachusetts Army National Guard and are the oldest outfits in the Army still existing today. I am not trying to throw cold water on your argument but facts are facts.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Hx23c84obwQ
A well regulated militia in this context is an army. Let Penn abd Teller explain it. They are dead on. (Language warning.)