Its disturbing how deeply the misconceptions on this issue (and every other freedom-related issue) have been embedded by our exposure and education. Notice the phrasing of the question, "Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?" The second amendment doesn't give the right to keep and bear arms to anyone, it prohibits the government from infringing on the right that exists - regardless of whether the government recognizes that right or not. Its not about "sporting purpose" or "self-defense", its about my basic right of self-ownership as a human being. I own myself, that is the root of liberty, and it is my right to use whatever means necessary to secure my life and the products of my life (i.e. the fruits of my labor) from anyone or anything who would try to deprive me of that. The government didn't grant me my life and I don't ask them for permission to live. The very fact that this question, and a many others that are fundamentally the same, gets asked again and again and again and again shows that 1) far to many people have forgotten that basic premise of liberty or that 2) those that keep asking the question over and over again (such as USA Today) are trying to change people's opinion by asking the same question, phrased slightly differently, until they find a way of wording it where people agree with their position.
I've seen requests on "another airgun forum" that airgunners not draw attention to themselves by mentioning firearm-related terms, reasoning that the Second Amendment does not apply to airguns, only firearms - implying that we are only allowed to have our airguns because the government allows us to. This is false reasoning because the Second Amendment addresses the right to "keep and bear arms" without specifying what those arms are. Even the 'militia' phrase implies that anything of use to defend ones life, property, homeland, etc... in military service is included. This has in the past included such things baseball bats, axes, spears, archery equipment, and more than likely airguns. Anything you can arm yourself with is an "arm."
As another thought on this subject, it seems to me that people in a civilized society would be able to carry arms at will and have the decency and self-control not to use them unless absolutely necessary and appropriate. It is only due to the decay of civilization that many people fear arms in the hands of their fellows and feel the need to limit access to them. Contrast this thought to the contention of those on the other side who say that there is no need of arms in a civil society.
Wow, what a rant!