> Given the context of militia and state, I read it more as a right of local governments to keep the means of self defense, not necessarily a "human right."

The second amendment is predicated both on the concept of a universal militia and (as is obliquely referenced in it's preamble) the concept that large standing armed military and/or internal security forces are institutions of tyranny: it is based on the idea that only by relying on the mass of the citizenry as the instrument of armed force can a state be free.