"I still think it's better if it's incorporated. It gives us more tools to use to defeat gun legislation."
If incorporated, just keep in mind that Congress and the USSC will be bound only by the wording of the second amendment, ambiguous as it is. They may decide that "bear arms" does not include concealed carry. That "keep arms' means in a public armory. That "arms" means a muzzle-loading rifle only. Or even that the second amendment only protects a "collective right" of the militia. ALL states are then bound by those decisions.
I like the state constitutions that read (like Maine): "Every citizen has a right to keep and bear arms and this right shall never be questioned". No confusion, no misinterpretation, and it's highly unlikely that the citizens of that state would allow their legislature to go against it.
"--- just keep in mind that Congress and the USSC will be bound only by the wording of the second amendment, ambiguous as it is."
Typical of the closet anti-gun crusader, -- insist that the clear words of the 2nd are "ambiguous".
You 'out' yourself once again paulsen.
I think you are a little too optimistic when you say "if unincorporated, the feds must lay off and leave it to the states." You know that the feds will still try and get their gun control legislation to pass strict scrutiny. Heck, the First Amendment sure didn't stop the feds from passing CFR.