The enumeration refers to art 1 sec 8, not the BOR.
The ~peoples~ RKBA's is enumerated in our 2nd Amendment to the Constitution.
But, you are correct in saying that FEDERAL gun laws are unconstitutional.
And, I am correct in saying you deny that our RKBA's need not be protected by States like CA, or cities like Chicago.
Deep hole you've dug, ray. Why are you posting on a conservative site, dedicated in part to restoring respect to our Constitution?
Will you PLEASE answer these questions?
1. If the BOR was intended to apply to the states, why did we have the inc. doctrine some 80 years after the cons came into being?
2. Why does the 1st amend say "CONGRESS shall make no law"?
3. Why did VA and others have state supported churches well after the cons came into being?
4. Did you not read the quotation from Barron v. Baltimore posted by that other guy?
5. If you disagree with that ruling, you still must accept as historical fact that for 80 years, the FED GOV, the Supreme Court, AND the state govs operated under the assumption that the BOR did not apply to the states. Were they all wrong for 80 years?
Please address James Madison, also.
In this relation, then, the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one; since its jurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only, and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty over all other objects.
James Madison, Federalist 39 (emphasis in original)
One more. Pg 391 of Constitutional Structures: Separated Powers and Federalism, Volume 1 of Amer. Con. Law, Louis Fisher, McGraw Hill, 1990
An exact quote, except for the abbreviations.
"As finally drafted and ratified, however, the first ten amends to the cons – the bor – limited ONLY THE FED GOV. In 1833, the Supreme Court explicitly held (Barron V. Balt) that the BOR restrained ONLY THE FED GOV, not the states… The idea of imposing a national standard on the states was REJECTED by the Sup Ct. in 1873 when it held that the primary purpose of the Civ War amends was to guarantee freedom for blacks. Moreover privs and immuns were to be protected BY THE STATES, NOT THE NAT GOV. Other decisions during this period also REFUSED TO APPLY THE BOR TO THE STATES.
1. Pervear v. Commonwealth,
2. Twitchell v. the commonwealth,
3. the justices v. murray,
4. walker v. sauvinet,
5. US v. cruikshank,
6. hurtado v. CA,
7. presser v. ILL,
8. spies v. ill,
9. mcelvaine vs. brush,
10. o’neill v. Vermont,
11. Maxwell v. dow,
How much more evidence do I need?