The words are in the Second

The Second Amendment doesn’t allow for the government to determine whether some have rights to own firearms, versus others who don’t. Seriously: Do we really want government holding this power?

You can debate the interpretation, but the idea of supporting a regulated militia can be defined as a strict definition of who and who cannot have assault weapons.  Specifically, anyone connected to some standard command and control system of a regulated militia can have an assault weapon.  This include official manufacturers, gun clubs properly organized, private and public security operations.

So, if you want an assault weapon, keep it at the registered armory in the gun club, or register a private armory for the thing in your home. But you need to be qualified in militia control and deployment of assault weapons, however the government determines that.

Consider the call up.
A national emergency, we need trained militia members. Government will be looking to the gun clubs. Government militia in times of need? They are not going to the inner city and grab the gang members who own two or three of these, unregulated. On the contrary, government would consider unregulated proliferation of assault weapons as a threat to a ell regulated militia, correctly.

Government guarantees of a regulated militia
It is stated, in the Second, that our regulated militia is a collective right. Technically, Rick Scott, in promoting mass shootings, violates that right. Events show we do not get the security of a regulated militia when Rick is handing out assault weapons to anyone.

It is all legal, it is in the Second, and if the NRA castratti does not like it, they can rebel and get shot.  The Supremes do not need to address precedent, the words in the Second are complete enough to provide closure, and when the definition of regulated militia change a bit, the Supremes can re-use the same words and do not need to overturn..  The words were meant to be looked at,  before precedence. And when the right to bear conflicts with regulation of interstate, the Supremes ave to choose.

We have folks who own and fire antique artillery pieces, or build rockets for a hobby. The are all regulated by militia command and control. It is done via the Second, the word, In order to preserve the security, a regulated militia.... in some order.

The NRA has no legal basis accept the current interpretation of those words, and bribing Rick Scott to promote mass shootings will no longer work.