I think that none of the "considerations" you raise are mentioned in the 2nd Amendment. As a strict constructionist (or, as has become popular of late, an "originalist"), I have to point out that the entire text of the 2nd Amendment says:
"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."
There are no training prerequisites here. As a strict constructionist, I argue that the states which require training before allowing carry are, in fact, in violation of the Constitution.
There are also no legal or moral/ethical considerations here. Should we be aware of such before we decide to carry around a device that is capable of killing another human being? Yes, of course we should. But the 2nd Amendment does not tell us that we "must."
If you subscribe to the stuff you quoted, it leaves me asking "Which side are you on?" After all, the anti-gunners tell us all the time that only the police are well-enough trained to be allowed to carry guns. Look how well that's been working out.