You did not give any reason why your reading must be the correct one.
Why on earth do you WANT a state to have the power to infringe upon one of your inalienable rights?
Your position makes no sense.
I do not want any state to have the power to infringe on rights, quite the contrary.
Belied by your own words, just above. You claim:
"The 2nd amendment does not limit state governments from trampling on RKBA." -- You can't have it both ways.. States do not have such powers. You claim they do..
However, there is no certain way of guaranteeing it. The Constitution does not create any federal apparatus for reaching down into the states and adjudicating whether or not the state has fulfilled its responsibility of protecting individual rights.
Wrong.. We have a supreme court to ajudicate such issues..
And if they continue to allow CA to violate our RKBA's, changes ~will~ be made..
Where do we disagree? In the manner in which powers are conferred, and the manner in which the protection of liberties is codified.
I agree to explain how I maintain these two assertions. You have said that I cannot have it both ways. The two assertions are:
1. I do not want any state to have the power to infringe on rights, quite the contrary.
2. The 2nd amendment does not limit state governments from trampling on RKBA.
If the state of CA confiscates your firearm, I am dead-set against that. It should not have given itself the power to do that. The citizens of CA and of other states should not stand for it. Thank goodness most other states have had wiser founders. And thank goodness the federal government limits itself from such a travesty. And it codified the 2nd Amendment to make dead sure of it.