And just how do they argue that the 2d does not apply in California? I can't imagine anyone for state's rights can honestly pick and choose which rights are covered and which are not.
They take an old case, no longer "good law", with respect to other BoR protections at least, and pretend that the 14th amendment did not apply the 2nd to state governments.
Of course some pre 14th amendment judges, (see Nunn v. State, 1 Kelly 243 (Ga. 1846) from the Georgia Supreme Court and some early commentators on the second amendment argued that unlike the first, which says "Congress shall make no law", the second applied to the states all along.
William Rawle, authored "A View of the Constitution of the United States of America" (1829). His work was adopted as a constitutional law textbook at West Point and other institutions. In Chapter 10 he describes the scope of the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms:
The prohibition is general. No clause in the constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretence by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.
If you are for state's rights, then you support the state constitution to define and protect the rights of it's citizens. When our country was founded, that's what we had -- each state had their own state constitution, plus the newly formed federal government had one.
The Bill of Rights in the U.S. Constitution originally applied to the federal government only. These were rights which the federal government could not violate. The states, of course, were free to do so, provided it didn't violate their respective state constitutions. Examples of this abound.
But, people who favor a strong central government, like P_A_I, wanted to apply the federal BOR to the states. And they got their way via the 14th amendment. This way, if the U.S. Supreme Court says the 1st amendment protects nude dancing, for example, then ALL states must allow it. Or sodomy. Or abortion. Or prohibits the display of the Ten Commandments. Or "Under God". And so on.
Keep in mind. If a federal amendment applies to the states, then whatever five justices of the U.S. Supreme Court says it means, that meaning then applies to all the states. For good OR bad.
Now, a gun grabber like P_A_I loves this concept. It he can somehow get the 2nd amendment to apply to the states (currently is doesn't, thank God), and if he can get five liberal justices of the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that, say, concealed carry is not protected by the second amendment and is in violation of some right to peaceful existence (or some such nonsense) then concealed carry would be banned across the U.S.