Re: Oh, joy -- our US gun nuts have reached El Reg.
As MrF says, the 2nd Amendment does include the militia statement, the text is:
"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."
BUT
There is no specification that the "bear arms" part depends on the preceding part being true. Indeed, in a legal sense, the "militia" part is *defined* as being true.
To extend it to an absurd degree, if the amendment said:
"The Moon made of green cheese, being necessary to the cheesiness of the heavens, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
...it would still apply.
The militia part is preamble, it provides background, but does not affect the applicability of the part about bearing arms. If we assume the writers of the 2nd amendment were not fucking morons, then we can assume they would have written something like:
"If a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
or...
"As long as a well regulated Militia is necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."
I think those writers realised how definite "shall not be infringed" sounds, I also think they would have specified if the right to keep/bear arms only applied to members of militias.
Of course, I am not an American judge, so continue as you were; my, or anyone else's, arguments probably won't change anyone's strong opinions on this matter.