Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretence, raised in the United States. Noah Webster, An Examination into the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, 1787

No it does not. It exist because history had proven multiple times that to subjagate a population a ruler always used a standing army to control the citizens. Generally disarmed or poorly armed citizens. The idea behind the 2A is that the people outnumber and outgun a standing army. We are governed by our consent, when we give that consent there are rules the representatives of the people are to follow. It's called the Consititution. If our government steps outsides it's mandate We the People can withdraw our consent until such time as the government returns to it's rightful place.

Are you serious? 1. What does that even mean? Other than you have no idea what to say. 2. The COTUS is dead? Since when? We have added and deleted Amendments from it. But yeah, the essential meaning of the document of yesterday is relavent today. Mainly because the Framers took note of human nature (unchanged in thousands of years and thousands of attempts) and the nature of power (unchanged in thousands of years and thousands of attempts). The Articles or Amendments address the failures of the past and lessons learned from those pasts. 3. The idea behind the 2A is that a tyrant always uses a standing army to subdue and control the governed. An armed citizenry which out number and outguns the army is essentual to freedom