No. As I stated, one of the amendments (of about 200) submitted by the states to Jefferson was one that applied the BOR to the states. It was rejected.
The due process clause of the 14th amendment has been used to selectively incorporate the first eight amendments and make them applicable to the states. The second amendment has never been incorporated -- it still applies only to the federal government.
Your gun rights are protected by your state constitution.
No - as already demonstrated above re: Article 6. It was not needed (an amendment to apply the BOR to the states) because it ALREADY APPLIED.
That view is one which many jurists use to manipulate the plain meaning of the Constitution to get the desired results - as opposed to a consistent and intellectually honest view which would show the Constitution is the highest law of the land and applies to the states.
WRONG. The 2nd needs NO "incorporation". The wording is universal, unlike the others. It does not forbid Congress or any other unit from an action. It just flat forbids it."Shall not be infringed." Nobody can do it.
It was rejected as being redundant. The supremacy clause applies the BOR to the states, as you well know and refuse to admit.
The due process clause of the 14th amendment has been used to selectively incorporate the first eight amendments and make them applicable to the states.
"Incorporation" is a cheap trick, a lawyerly way to empower the judiciary.
The second amendment has never been incorporated -- it still applies only to the federal government.
Dream on, paulsen.
The question remains, why do you insist upon giving states the power to infringe upon our RKBA's? How does this advance our cause of retaining individual liberty?
Your gun rights are protected by your state constitution.
No they aren't, in Calif, at least. What do you gain by spouting such an obvious bit of BS, paulsen?
"Incorporation" is not about "due process", it is about "privileges and immunities". Incorporation is an invention of the Supreme Court which is mentioned nowhere in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, or any subsequent amendment to the Constitution. I know of no Congressional legislation which addresses "incorporation". It is simply a mechanism which recognizes that the Supreme Court is inconsistent in its application of the Constitution and is determined to shape government rather than defend freedom.