The American constitution says nothing about private gun ownership. Activist judges have manipulated it. The whole right is:
"A well regulated militia, being the necessity to the security of a free state, the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"
Firstly. It speaks of a "A well REGULATED militia"
The regulation is somewhat contrary to "shall not be infringed" id take this as light regulation. But for whom?
"Militia" requires more than one person. And "rights if people" is also capable of being pluralistic.
At no time is personal security mentioned. "Persons" referring to individuals is used in the 4th ammendment. Person in the fifth. Him in the sixth.
So this use of "people" is a deliberate term to refer to more than one.
Only a group of "people" can form a "militia" that is to be "well regulated". Part of being well regulated can easily include what arms and where/how to keep them.
How about arms only being at listed militia properties that are not residential addresses, that require an individual to use one key to access the firearm and another to access the ammunition for the sole purpose of training on the property before returning. Only by majority militia decision could the arms be removed from the property.
All members of the militia must pass private psychological assessment and never be convicted of violence. On the day they must pass drug testing.
These restriction (going further than i support) would still be in line with the second ammendment.
In short: There is no US right for a person to own a firearm in the constitution
