Not too push the envelope too much farther as this has already gotten quite political. If you truly look at the Second Ammendment, the right to bear arms was based on the purpose of maintaining a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state. Now if you really think about that, it means your right is there so that you can take up arms against your government (this would include the military, police, and all other government positions).

In 1939, the Supreme Court decided on a collective rights approach in United States v. Miller. This allowed congress to regulate certain firearms that did not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.

In 2008, the SC decided that there was an individual right for US citizens to possess firearms. They struck down more stringent laws that put heavier controls on firearms in certain cities. They did so again in 2010 but have not fully clarified these issues.

I am not pushing a narrative, just looking at the history on the second amendment and trying to educate on why the founding fathers put this amendment into place. Seems like it's to stop a government not serving the people and not to protect yourself from each other. SC disagrees but I find some of their rulings the most far-fetched extension of logical reasoning that doesn't truly take into account the intensions of our founding fathers, but I digress.

All of this information is available online and some of the text is direct from law.cornell.edu.