This argument is faulty because legal interpretation generally assumes that lawmakers act with clear purpose. More important, the Senate that made this critical deletion was dominated by Federalists who were skeptical of the militia's performance during the Revolutionary War and opposed to the idea that the future of American defense lay with the militia rather than a regular army. They had sound reasons not to commit the national government to supporting a mass militia, and thus to prefer a phrasing implying that the militia need not embrace the entire adult male population if Congress had good reason to require otherwise. The evidence of text and history makes it very hard to argue for an expansive individual right to keep arms.
http://www.historycooperative.org/journals/wm/59.1/rakove.html
"...By focusing on behavior--the ownership of firearms, their use in daily life, and perhaps most important in this context, the function and operations of the militia--Bellesiles casts the constitutional debate in a new light. What difference would it make to our understanding of the Second Amendment if we found that ownership was far less widespread than previously assumed, that firearms had little value for either self-protection or the slaughter of succulent mammals, and that the militia was typically a moribund joke in time of peace and of little military value in time of war?"
"...However hallowed a place the image of a citizens' militia occupied in American political ideology, Bellesiles argues, prosaic reality never corroborated normative expectations. In peace, the militia quickly atrophied (if it had any vigor at all); in war, its shortcomings became embarrassingly evident."
=====================================
It appears as though Mr. Rakove has not rejected the fraudulent "scholarship" of Mr. Bellisles. We need to put this question to him.
Under any other construction of the amendment relating to the [right to keep and bear arms], than that it declared the [right to keep and bear arms] to be wholly exempt from the power of Congress, the amendment could neither be said to correspond with the desire expressed by a number of the States, nor be calculated to extend the ground of public confidence in the government." --- James Madison, REPORT OF 1799 on the Kentucky-Virginia Resolutions