Although we have seen and heard various interpretations of the Second Amendment -- here’s another one.
But first, look at it again:
"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."
Note that if we were to delete the words, a "well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state," we are left with: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
These last 14 words alone would logically suffice to include the militia provision without the necessity of including it in the Second Amendment. But the fact that the militia provision was included, where it was totally unnecessary (since the "infringement" provision would necessarily also include the militia provision), the framer, I believe, intended the real purpose of the Second Amendment as limiting the right to keep and bear arms for a "well-regulated militia" and not for all citizens.