Reply #2: You might enjoy reading this. The duty to be armed for defense of self and state...

[jmg257]

http://www.constitution.org/consprin.htm

"...
Upon establishment of the social contract, the natural right of what in the state of nature would be self defense is transformed into the duty to defend the state and the constitution, including oneself as a member of the state.

Defense of the state and the constitution includes defense against threats of all kinds, including invasion or attack, insurrection, criminal acts, natural or manmade disasters, or public ignorance or apathy.

The duty to defend the state and the constitution entails the right to acquire the means and the skills to exercise that duty, including the skills of the soldier, the policeman, and the fire and rescue worker, to be organized to act alone or in concert with others to exercise those skills to meet any threat that may arise, and the power to exercise those skills and use those means, alone or in concert with others, with or without official direction or participation.

In a republic, all citizens are soldiers, policemen, and fire and rescue workers, with the default rank of private. Delegation of official powers to agents of government is the conferring of higher rank to those persons, and persons of lesser rank are subject to the lawful orders of persons of higher rank when persons of higher rank are present and exercising their authority legally and effectively. If not, their rank ceases and highest rank devolves on the person present who most effectively represents that authority, whatever his previous status. A citizen with the default rank of private also outranks any person who is acting in violation of law, for the rank of lawbreakers is lower than that of private, whatever their previous status.

A citizen not only has the duty to obey the law, but to help enforce it, within his ability, and to do what he can to prepare himself and others to do so.
...
"


I definitely would agree with the vital role the people had in defense of the state as mandated in the constitution; certainly there was a duty to be armed for militia service. It seems those militias were always sanctioned by a governmental authority, not just individuals acting on their own. Of course the right exists and is secured to be armed for self-defense and other legal "selfish" reasons, but I would wonder about a duty to be armed for these purposes.