Agreed abuse of Emergency Powers. But irrelevant in this context. State National Guard fits perfectly. Each State must "...provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage"

Furthermore, 14th incorporated the bill of rights to the actions of states. So even if you're claiming that 2A only limited the fed gov't power, the 14th days the state can't infringe those rights either.

And bluntly, it's dumb to say that 2A isn't an individual right, because the main body of the constitution already gives the gov't the right to raise and arm an army, and levy taxes for it. If it's the right of the gov't to be armed, then it's redundant to have an amendment.

Thank you for defining each State's National Guard.

Except it's not. Abuse of power was EXPECTED. Hence the quote about the tree of liberty, and the wording of 2A. The idea was that an armed populace should ABLE TO be a check on the power of tyrants. As it would be, had Dems not been intent on disarming themselves.

The abuse of power, that a State's well regulated militia will be able to "defence of such State". You can keep coming up with INTERPRETATIONS. Meanwhile, the raw text: