Considering that, in light of what meaning the language had at the time the Constitution was penned, I don't see what the big deal is since we essentially -are- the "militia" and we wouldn't be "well-regulated" if we didn't have access to the proper equipment.
So this op. ed. is, in essence, just another flub from the "living document" school of thought.
Nothing to really get one's feathers ruffled over.
Edited to Add: Pennsylvania got it right, at least, by preempting this exact sort of nonsense...
"The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned."
and:
"To guard against the transgressions of the high powers which we have delegated, we declare that everything in this article is excepted out of the general powers of government and shall forever remain inviolate."
I double-dang well guarantee you that at some point in time, the politicians will be arguing about the TRUE meaning of "excepted" and "inviolate" in never-ending attempts to disarm us all completely by trying to tell us that phrase really doesn't mean what it says. Nothing could be clearer than "shall not be infringed," but you see what they've done with that over time.
John