[robertpaulsen]

Wow, you do read a lot into other poster's statements. Allow me to be crystal clear with mine.

The second amendment does NOT apply to the states. It has never applied to the states. It only applies to the federal government.

[tpaine]

bumpkin

[William Tell]

robertpaulsen said: "The second amendment does NOT apply to the states. It has never applied to the states. It only applies to the federal government.

Well, here we go again.

At the risk of making everyone dizzy, please explain the statement in Dred Scott concerning his carrying of arms wherever he went. This pre-dated the Fourteenth Amendment.

In light of the Fourteenth Amendment, and recognizing that the Gitlow decision found the First Amendment so relevant, the applicability of the Second Amendment, at least since the passage of the Fourteenth Amendment, does include the states, notwithstanding the inability of the Supreme Court to understand the plain language.

[Ken H]

Wow, you do read a lot into other poster's statements.

Do you agree or disagree that their statements mean that the correct reading of the current Constitution is that the Second Amendment applies to all levels of government?

Allow me to be crystal clear with mine.

The second amendment does NOT apply to the states. It has never applied to the states. It only applies to the federal government.

That doesn't exactly address my question, which was, "Do you think the correct reading of the current Constitution means that no level of government may infringe the RKBA?".

Your answer might be referring to the current reality of Second Amendment application, rather than what you think the correct reading is.

So let's try again:

Do you think the correct reading of the current Constitution means that no level of government may infringe the RKBA?