Nothing is wrong with my reading comprehension. Let me help you with your reading comprehension what I asked is to cite the constitution that mandates gun ownership, something that has not been done. An act of congress does not make something constitutional. I.E. Obama care.
The federalist papers is not the constitution it can give us a great insight on what they were thinking but it isn't constitutional. Many of the centralist statist ideas of Hamilton were thwarted by the more liberty minded anti federalist.
The constitution does not mandate gun ownership. I never contended such. A law passed by congress (or the state bodies) mandating gun ownership is constitutional is what I contend. The constitution clearly gives authority over the militia to congress (not exclusively), including the authority to arm the militia. The constitution does not state what methods congress must use to arm the militia, therefore passing a law requiring each member to procure arms does derive its authority from the constitution and does not exceed any limits imposed by the constitution: it is constitutional.
ps an interesting thought I just had: congress has the authority to arm the militia, but does it have the authority to disarm the militia?