Though I'd like to agree, I don't. I find the Second Amendment to be oddly worded and vague. Simple and clear is easy to write, even I can do it, just lop off the (irrelavent?) militia phrase.
I like to think that the authors of the Bill of Rights were intelligent folks. They didn't throw fluff in there for the hell of it. As much as I wish it to be otherwise, I don't see the second amendment's intent as providing for "personal protection" in general. It seems to me that the intent was to keep the people armed as a deterrent to the Federal Government. If a by-product of that leads to other benefits, that's one thing, but unfortunately, they specified a reason for gun ownership.
Taking half of a sentence and declaring it clear is misleading. I understand your frustration though.