And the floodgates open with the new legislative session in Trenton

[TheShootist 3]

The problem is not with the legislature per se. It is with the general public.

If we removed the 2nd amendment today, would it matter in the context of the Constitution? No!

Does it matter in light of the ignorance surrounding the complexity of what the 2nd entails? Yes!

On the one hand, 'Miller' noted that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment is “to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of [the Militia]”. 307 U.S. at 178. Likewise, 'Heller' acknowledged that “the Second Amendment’s prefatory clause” (“[a] well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State”) “announces the purpose for which the right was codified: to prevent elimination of the militia.” 554 U.S. at 599

For those who've not studied this in depth, and have relied on decades of misinformation, the 2nd is tied to Article 1, Section 8, Cls. 15 & 16, and the pre-existing state statutes that required all able-bodied men to maintain in good working order a rifle, along with other accoutrement necessary to operate as a soldier. 

The issue at hand is that, in general, the pro-2nd community listens to those who have a vested interest in keeping the struggle alive, rather than putting the issue to rest.

Militia is, as George Mason author of the amendment asked rhetorically, "What is the militia? It is the whole people."

The whole people operating with the ultimate authority "to execute the Laws of the Union." So the question is whether we should be begging our representatives to abide their oath, or whether we should reclaim our authority by revitalizing the militia, and put the cuffs on them when they violate their oath?

There is a method for revitalizing the Constitutional Militia, and it doesn't entail a bunch of yahoo's running around claiming to be militia.