"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."

What is it about a well-regulated militia being necessary..." that you do not understand?

Had the Framers meant only that the right of the people to keep and bear amrs shall not be infringed, that is what they would have written.

Instead, they placed a clause in front that was then very important. The nation then did not have a standing army, nor did it have arsenals established in strategic places. Therefore, they extended the right to keep and bear arms so that militas could be raised as needed.

Today, we have the Army, the Navy, the Marines and the Air Force along with their atendants Reserves and we have the National Guards at the state level and we have far superior state, county and municipal police to the thinly spread constables of the post-revolutionary era. We do not need to raise militias from among the citizenry and we do not need them to bring their own weapons, should they join the Army. Therefore, the 2nd amendment is obsolete and should be repealed.

I have nothing against gun ownership, but guns should be a privilege, not a right. Gun owners should be tested and licensed and all guns should be registered. And gun owners should be held liable for any crimes committed with the guns they own. That is, if a gun is lost or stolen and later used in a crime, the licensed owner should be liable.