Actually, it is the right of the individual to keep and bear arms that is "protected" against infringement from all sources. Federal and state. The Militia is an INCIDENTAL objective beneficiary of that set of protected individual rights.
The militia itself has no particular rights not governed in legislation, hence "well-regulated". But the INDIVIDUAL does have rights....and they shall not be infringed. Period.
No. Just the federal government. States are free to infringe, bound only by their state constitution.
But let's say you're right and I'm wrong. Please explain how it is that some states allow concealed carry and some don't. If the second amendment applies to the states, then how can the second amendment mean one thing in one state and mean something different in another?
Doesn't it apply equally to all states? Doesn't Due Process or Equal Protection under the laws apply? Can you imagine the first amendment or the fourth amendment being applied this way?
I am interested in your explanation.
"The Militia is an INCIDENTAL objective beneficiary of that set of protected individual rights"
Yeah, just brush it aside if it gets in the way of your interpretation. The Founding Fathers did a lot of that "incidental" stuff when they wrote the U.S. Constitution.
Let me give you two examples:
A) 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.
B) The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
You see absolutely no difference between "A" and "B" -- they mean exactly the same thing to you. "A" merely has some additional words, incidental to the real meaning. The Founding Fathers just threw them in because they looked cool.
Why even mention a militia? I mean, if the second amendment means "B" then ALL objectives are covered -- militias, hunting, competition, self defense, protecting the state -- everything.
"The militia itself has no particular rights not governed in legislation, hence "well-regulated"."
I have no idea what that means. The "well regulated Militia" referenced in the second amendment meant a militia that was organized, standardized, armed, trained and ready, with officers appointed by the state. This was all covered in the Militia Act of 1792.
"But the INDIVIDUAL does have rights....and they shall not be infringed. Period."
I agree. The individual has the RKBA. That individual right, however, is protected by the state constitution, not the second amendment. So say the courts, anyways.