You'd have a heck of a time finding a juror in either place that would think there was anything wrong with that. I think your concern about the right of a RTKBA juror to scotch the conviction is purely theoretical.
The thing to do is bring more and better Heller cases, and attack the problem from the legislative end. Where the 2nd Amendment has been consistently ignored for years by everyone, that's the only thing to do.
I was involved on the trial level with three, perhaps four, cases of juror misconduct. Two attempted to justify their refusal to deliberate with some form of "jury nullification" but it didn't get far. There just aren't that many cases where jurors mess up, and as I noted before any decent defense counsel is going to challenge the law BEFORE we get to the point of a jury deciding if his client is going to the Greybar Motel.
If there's a systematic injustice it needs to be remedied at the appellate and legislative level. The chances of one particular person with the guts to stand against 11 other people in a small room ALSO having a strong constitutional principle regarding something that isn't supported anywhere in his state, and ALSO having the brains to verbalize his objection in a way that (a) won't get him committed for contempt, and (b) will persuade any other juror, is vanishingly small. That's not the way to get any major change done.
The ONLY thing? I've spoken with Dick Heller personally, and the fact is that it took him and Alan Gura about 20 years to set up that case and bring it through to its conclusion. It very nearly didn't make it, because three other plaintiffs were dismissed for want of standing, because they weren't under felony-level indictment for violating an unconstitutional law.
That's 20 years worth of prosecutions that have been proven unconstitutional, and that's a travesty of justice. Isn't the principal purpose of the jury to render a JUST verdict for not only the State, but also the defendant?
You'd have a heck of a time finding a juror in either place that would think there was anything wrong with that.
All it takes is one. And besides, it has already happened in at least two cases which we know of: Jury nullification at work in marijuana, gun cases - and not just formally hung juries, but full-on acquittals. "Chaos every time?"
Jury deliberations are secret. From the last words of the article: "For that reason, we'll likely never know exactly when nullification is being exercised. But we can celebrate it when we see it."
I was involved on the trial level with three, perhaps four, cases of juror misconduct.
See, I had a feeling you were talking about unicorns - three or four cases in 30 years. So why are you throwing out wild-eyed terms like "chaos?"
That's not the way to get any major change done.
Remember the parable of the starfish?
A juror is not required to directly participate in systematic injustice, regardless of whether or not it can be addressed at the appellate level.