A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
So, from my understanding in our second Amendment, we have the right to a milita, and the right to keep and bear arms. Let’s break it down a little bit.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to a free state," in today’s common practice of the good ol’ USA if we formed a well regulated militia, we would be considered terrorists even if we were and will fight for the people. Just look at the bundy case in neveda. From my understanding "well regulated" means "proper working order" so if we had a proper working militia it would be legal.
"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
We all know what rights are, we also have the right to “KEEP” and “BEAR” Arms.
Meaning of “BEAR”:(of an object) to carry (he was bearing a brimming tray of glasses)
Arms: firearms, small arms, etc.
We have the right to firearms, according to this, of all make and models, not limited to what the government wants us to have.
Infringed: actively break the terms of a (law; agreement; etc.)
"THIS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"
So obviously our fore fathers were looking out for us ahead of time and made sure that our rights weren’t violated in any way for firearms
So we have the right to keep and carry Arms.
Now, A Supreme Court member wants to switch this amendment to say “while serving in a militia” so if this happens then a whole bunch of militias are going to pop up all over the states and I doubt he would want that to happen.
So in basic terms we have the rights:
To create a well regulated milita
To keep and bear arms.
This shall not be infringed