[Ken H]

If incorporated, then States banning CC would have those laws struck down.

True, but I thought we agreed for sake of argument that the right to CC was not a right at the federal level?

Just pointing out that incorporation has potential upside but no downside.

You agreed that the Second Amendment was intended to set limits on Federal infringement of the RKBA. An incorporated Second Amendment would set the same limits on State infringement of the RKBA.

I think you've been arguing as if the Second Amendment could be used to limit the RKBA.

[P_A_I]

Ken H corrected paulsen:

" --- incorporation has potential upside but no downside.

You agreed that the Second Amendment was intended to set limits on Federal infringement of the RKBA. An incorporated Second Amendment would set the same limits on State infringement of the RKBA.

I think you've been arguing as if the Second Amendment could be used to limit the RKBA. -- "

Paulsen has indeed been making that exact argument, but I doubt he will admit to that fact. - He will either ignore your comment or pretend to 'misunderstand'.

Paulsens claim that because the 2nd is deemed 'unincorporated', that our RKBA's can therefore be infringed upon by State or local governments simply ignores our basic constitutional principles. --- Our Republic was founded to protect individual rights, not to allow States/localities in the union to infringe upon them.

Thanks for your input on this thread.