No, what it says is: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Those of us who understand the Constitution also know that the 2nd Amendment was originally only a restriction on the federal government; state and local governments were empowered to regulate firearms, within the confines of their own state constitutions (many of which did not explicitly protect those rights until recent times). Although this was technically changed by Heller, from a practical perspective, the incorporation of the 2nd Amendment to the states has had almost no effect.
Also, those of us who understand the Constitution know that the protection on rights is not absolute. The 1st Amendment does not stop the government from enforcing libel laws, or outlawing threats, or curtailing the circulation of classified documents. The right to be secure in your home from unreasonable searches does not mean the police cannot enter your home if they are in hot pursuit of a suspect, or if they see you using illegal drugs in your living room through the bay window.
Incorrect. Banning all rifles is unconstitutional; banning "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges" is constitutional.
The classification of an assault rifle is based on physical properties of the firearm. Those physical properties are not wished away by semantic games.