[Ken H]

Or, with Kelo as an example, everyone would then have no protection against infringement from state and local governments.

It is misleading to say that everyone would "then" have no protection against such infringments on the RKBA. There is no federal protection against state and local infringments "now". You already conceded that a SCOTUS decision saying that the RKBA was NOT an individual right wouldn't affect state laws - Post #607

[robertpaulsen]

"It is misleading to say that everyone would "then" have no protection against such infringments on the RKBA."

Technically you're correct. Perhaps it would be more correct to say, "everyone would then be on notice by the U.S. Supreme Court that they have no protection against such infringments on the RKBA."

You will agree that property grabs by state and local governments have increased since Kelo despite the fact that, as you say, there was no protection before Kelo? Funny how that works, huh?

Let's not gloss over my main point with your technicality. State and local RKBA abuses would increase with a Kelo-type decision on gun rights by the U.S. Supreme Court if incorporated.