A militia is merely a group of individuals acting in concert to protect the country against a common threat. And, according to the constitution, the militia was to be led by officers appointed by the state.
If they're leaderless and acting in concert for individual gain, that's nothing more than an armed mob.
Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom? Congress shall have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American ... The unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the People." -- Tench Coxe, 1788.
Isn’t it ‘...necessary to the security of a free State...’?
“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.”
That means we have to define ‘State’ and ‘infringed’, doesn’t it?
They might as easily defend their neighborhood, town or state.
If they're leaderless and acting in concert for individual gain, that's nothing more than an armed mob.
I imagine the King saw the minutemen as an armed mob.