I’ve heard a lot of dismissive attitudes and pooh poohing over the idea that the need for a well regulated militia does not translate to the personal right to keep and bear arms.
The movies Dunkirk and Darkest Hour portray an incredible yet very true danger faced by the British people that took place in our own lifetime: the destruction of their standing army. This would have made them even more vulnerable to a Nazi invasion and from there a loss to their freedom (and the lives of all Jewish Brits).
When Winston Churchill commissioned all citizens with private boats to serve as a military flotilla to retrieve the army, he was calling forth the militia into action. This action saved the army.
Had Churchill not called forth the flotilla, and the army had been lost, the defense of Britain would have been up to every British citizen, serving in a militia.
We may say there is no need for private gun owndership so long as each state has a well regulated militia, but what happens if THAT militia is destroyed or rendered useless, similar to the very real threat that faced Britain? What happens then is every able bodied citizen brings his arms and talents forward, and the defense of our liberties continues.
Churchill rallied the people to agree to never surrender to the loss of their freedoms from the very real totalitarian threat. They were prepared to fight on the beaches, on the streets, etc. This happened in our own lifetime. Can a militia of free citizens face down an organized and powerful army of an oppressive nation? It can, if the cost of occupation is too high. This is the lesson of the post World War II. God help us if we ever have to come to that, but freedom isn’t guaranteed. Or free.
It is what a free people does. Are we not a free people?