In the Heller decision Scalia writes that the 2ed Amendment protected a preexisting right to bear a firearm for self-protection... at least for people who weren't slaves. "The People" sounds all inclusive to us but never meant everyone in the US.
Yet the well regulated militia clause is there in the 2ed for a reason and the Constitution gave Congress in Article 1 Sec 8, the power to set the standards for this citizen militia. These standards were codified in the Militia Acts of 1792 which specify that membership in the militia was NOT voluntary:
"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia.."
and they were mandated to have a firearm with specified equipment and ammunition whether they wanted to own a firearm or not:
"That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service…."
Leaving aside the issue of whether this was the first mandate citizens must purchase something they may not want, this hardly looks like the 2ed was written to protect an individual right for own a firearm for self-protection or hunting. It's a government MANDATE that militia members must own a firearm.
If there's an individual right to own a firearm for self-protection then it's not in the 2ed no matter how much it's bastardized to claim one. It's an unenumerated right in the Ninth. But then neither the Dems and especially the GOP respect the Ninth. As Bork once said, it's an inkblot on the Constitution beneath which we'll never know the Framers' intent.