2nd Amendment (again)

So the NYTimes once again has an article about the 2nd Amendment. This one does a nice job of analyzing the syntactical structure of the Amendment, stating that the first part (about an armed militia) is a "purpose clause", while the second part is an "operational clause." The reason for the article is the Supreme Court is presently evaluating the 2nd Amendment and is expected to decide something about it shortly.

Here's the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, [purpose clause]

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. [operation clause]

Waxing oratorical, I drafted up this note to the editors at the NY Times:

To the Editor -

The reason for ensuring people have the right to keep and bear arms being encoded in the purpose clause, the need for this right should rest on whether it can be stated that an armed citizenry is capable of ensuring our nation's security today.

Reminds me of my college days studying Cicero.