Well, the fact of the matter is for almost 100 years, that's precisely what the law of the land was - see Barron v. Baltimore. It wasn't until the enactment of the 14th Amendment, and subsequent cases that developed from the 14th, did we see the incorporation doctrine come to affect most of the Bill of Rights. Until a couple of years ago, the Supreme Court had never extended or applied the incorporation doctrine to the 2nd Amendment.
Interestingly enough, it was the Conservative justices in previous years that had fought to limit incorporation. But, because of the gun issue, we see the roles reversed, with liberal fighting against it, and conservatives for it. There still are some orthodox conservative jurists who would argue against incorporation, even in the 2nd Amendment. It seems clear, however, that Scalia and Thomas aren't in that camp, and it's likely that this ruling will favor absolute incorporation of the 2nd Amendment.
So it can be argued that free speech may be squelched by a state law. Freedom of religion, assembly, etc. Charming.
Before Barron v. Baltimore, some state courts had interpreted the Bill of Rights as applying to state action as well. Aside from that, Barron v. Baltimore was overturned by the 14th amendment with the privileges and immunities language. The Supreme Court in the Slaughterhouse case went against the language and intent of the amendment and said that this language did not incorporate the BOR against the states. Slaughterhouse should be overturned.
The original intent of the BoR was that it applied at all levels of government.
However States were quick to deny that and the early Supreme Court turned away from the original intent.
The ‘liberal’ 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has already incorporated the 2nd Amendment as applying to the states.
The 7th Circuit Court of Appeals did not, citing Slaughterhouse.
Slaughterhouse is going to be slaughtered.