Regarding the 2nd Amendment, it says:
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.
A very oddly worded sentence, to say the least, and constructed in the typically negative orientation of the Bill of Rights; focusing on what the federal government can't do. I know that power-hungry, government-control-over-everyone-and-everything so-called "liberals"
want to interpret the 2nd Amendment as applying solely to "well-regulated Militia", but, that's not reflective of good English grammar. This sentence, however annoying, is clearly a very carefully constructed statement. Looks like a three-humped camel designed by a committee to me. Personally, if I were constructing that sentence I would have inserted the word "and" after the second comma for clarity, but there's no reasonable way to interpret this sentence as only applying to state militias.