The key question on the scope of the Second Amendment is, “What was it’s intended purpose?” I remember my history prof. in college saying that it appeared the purpose was to assure that American citizens could raise and arm their own militia against an oppressive government gone rogue against those very citizens. So it stands to reason that as the armed ability of the government increases, so should the ability of the citizens. It doesn’t make sense to assume that the sole purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that all citizens could shoot quail for dinner.
Framers Madison and Hamilton made their intent quite clear as to the role, extent, purpose, and membership of the Militia in their discussion of it in The Federalist, and how the Militia (who are the People themselves, in arms) related to the States' governments, and to the Federal government.
The Second Amendment was written to ensure that state and federal governments, and not even Congress, could effectively disarm the People to make them their playthings, by passing a law that might read, under the Article I powers of Congress to prescribe the armament and training of the Militia, that the Militia should be armed with small sticks and piles of throwing-stones, and should not train with them more often than once every 20 years, or something like that.