The Second Amendment Issue is tricky. I've been thinking about it alot lately and have only snippets of thoughts, ideas so far.
The videotaping etc. is not as clear cut as you may think, since many of the cameras are privately owned/operated. The camera at your local ATM, for instance.
A very smart person once said to me, years ago, that cable television transformed America. Now, the internet is doing the same thing.
I have fairly little heartburn about PRIVATE video surveillence cameras, such as those found in banks or high-risk stores, such as 7/11s. There is clear purpose for them and you know going in that you are on PRIVATE PROPERTY. Cameras operated by government agencies in public places are very much a concern, however. I cannot fault putting cameras in and around nuclear weapons bunkers, for example, but they are NOT tolerable on public streets or highways. Whether or not I have something to hide is utterly beside the point. NO GOVERNMENT AGENT has any legitimate authority to monitor the comings and goings of the citizenry for any reason. To monitor the comings and goings of a SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL, for specific reasons, with a valid and SPECIFIC COURT ORDER or warrant, is another kettle of fish. BUT cameras which are just mounted any old where are NOT authorized, nor should they be.
With regard to the Second Amendment, it is pretty specific: "...[S]hall not be infringed" is fairly clear language. LOCAL government might reasonably say that certain TYPES of weapons must not be discharged within certain parameters or must be stored in such a way as to prevent or minimize any accidental discharge or damage to the neighbors. For example, unless FedGov or other enemy tanks were coming down my block, I'd prefer my neighbor go out to the country to practice with his TOW missiles or LAAWS rockets. It's only common courtesy, after all. I'd also like it if he kept them in some sort of underground bunker so as to prevent damage to my house, if HE has a house fire or something. I would surely do the same. On the other hand, if my neighbor had such toys, I'd sure be over helping him play with them often!
Insofar as simple possession, bear in mind that the second amendment does not GRANT a right at all; it only requires government to respect and leave alone a PRE-EXISTING right, one which should be exercised by the population a whole lot more than it is. The specific inclusion of the Second Amendment was to remind people, specifically the government, that We, The People, maintained a close hold on the reset button (the CTRL-ALT-DEL button) of government, to be used at our SOLE discretion, when government gets too far out of hand and our "servants" show too much interest in becoming our masters.
The ONLY "weapons" I would not want to see in ANYONE'S hands are the so-called WMDs. Actually, except for your basic nukes, these are primarily terror weapons or area denial weapons, not capable of destruction at all; only large scale killing of people caught unprotected in the right circumstances (or wrong, depending). These are the sort of things that even governments should not have available to them.
I hope this helps you sort out your ambivalence about the Second Amendment.