No way in hell would a leftist use #29 as it explains "well regulated" in the second paragraph!
It requires no skill in the science of war to discern that uniformity in the organization and discipline of the militia would be attended with the most beneficial effects, whenever they were called into service for the public defense. It would enable them to discharge the duties of the camp and of the field with mutual intelligence and concert an advantage of peculiar moment in the operations of an army; and it would fit them much sooner to acquire the degree of proficiency in military functions which would be essential to their usefulness.
It's all about training as is all too obvious from the content!
One last pass here.
Two points:
#1 My post was about the incorrectness of the original post, not anything elase.
#2 Never put one extra word in a law, or other writen item for that matter. If 2 simply said "The people shall have the right to keep and bear arms,: it could not be attacked in the "puropse" issue.
#3: In #29, Hamilton wrote "If a well regulated militia be the most natural defence of a free country, it ought certainly to be under the regulation and at the disposal of that body which is constituted the guardian of the national security...confiding the regulation of the militia to the direction of the national authority...(and) reserving to the states...the authority of training the militia".
Not good for us!