the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

I don't see the difficulty here. Bear = carry. Arms = weapon. Pretty straightforward. The context of their usage does not bely the base meaning of the phrase. It doesn't matter if there are 5 million instances of its use being in relation to organised armed action, which I'm assuming your implying means its reserved for the military or some such nonsense. Furthermore, are you also implying that private citizens could not commit to an organised armed action? The only thing about bearing arms that has shifted in the last 200 years is the type of arms being borne.