Is Gun Ownership a Right?

[NugginFutz]

The reason that the Second Amendment wasn't framed that way is because "well regulated" did not refer to being regulated by Congress. It meant being properly trained, equipped, and subject to military regulations.

Ok - I'll bite. Where in the 2A does it say "properly trained, equipped, and subject to military regulations"?

Surely, you must have also read the preceding two paragraphs.

https://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution states: "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." The reference to a "well regulated" militia, probably conjures up a connotation at odds with the meaning intended by the Framers. In today's English, the term "well regulated" probably implies heavy and intense government regulation. However, that conclusion is erroneous.
The words "well regulated" had a far different meaning at the time the Second Amendment was drafted. In the context of the Constitution's provisions for Congressional power over certain aspects of the militia, and in the context of the Framers' definition of "militia," government regulation was not the intended meaning. Rather, the term meant only what it says, that the necessary militia be well regulated, but not by the national government.

The author clearly states that the interpretation you are applying, Stan, is erroneous. It does not fit the "context of the Framers' definition of "militia," government regulation."