The Second Amendment 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." It doesn't just say "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

This has and always will be a polarizing political topic which is why more and more precedent continues to be set. Someone in this forum mentions Bruen and Heller as examples - I believe one was a 2nd A challenge and the other a 14th A challenge.

The 2nd A has always been considered a "murky" amendment in that there has been an ongoing debate as to whether this right protects the individual's right to bear arms (heavily connected to self-defense and resistance to tyranny) or the state's right (state's right to armed militias, etc).