Besides, even tho I haven't read the Constitutions of all of the 50 states, I think it's safe to say they their own state constitutions make it very clear that our right to bear arms is sacrosanct -- & many of them are probably even stricter that the US Constitution when it comes to prohibiting the state governments from infringing on those rights.
I say let's take a look @ how she spins this issue.
Federalist, anti-Federalist
Irregardless. Ever heard of Dred Scott?
It is where the 14th amendment came from.
Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and
subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States and of the State wherein they reside. No
State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any
person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the
laws.
Hence fourth
From the Second:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
When a State makes or enforces a law prohibiting the "Right
to Bear Arms" they are violating the 14th amendment.
Either that or it is a return of the days of Dred Scott.
(Not a good place to go Ms. Sotomayor).
And yes I do equate removing the 2nd and 14th with slavery.
From the Second:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
A power delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
specifically the 2nd amendment.
From the 9th:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
It does not state that the state can deny rights given them
by the constitution.