One thing to remember in all of this is that not all rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights are guaranteed absolutely. Most famously, perhaps, is that freedom of speech is in no way absolute---one cannot incite a riot by yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, of course.
Correct, but there are limits put on such legislation;
Justice Harlan said it best:
"-- [T]he full scope of the liberty guaranteed by the Due Process Clause `cannot be found in or limited by the precise terms of the specific guarantees elsewhere provided in the Constitution.
This `liberty´ is not a series of isolated points pricked out in terms of the taking of property;
the freedom of speech, press, and religion;
the right to keep and bear arms;
the freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures; and so on.
It is a rational continuum which, broadly speaking, includes a freedom from all substantial arbitrary impositions and purposeless restraints, . . --"
Not quite. When the government maintains them for use by the standing army, so too must they also be available for the militia. That's the little guarantee the founders had in mind to make it certain that government remained the servant of the people, and not the master.