robertpaulsen: Yes they are. And they applied to the federal government only.
What part of "shall not be infringed" is giving you difficulty, Robert dear? For that matter, what part of "supreme law of the land" do you not understand? If it applies only to the federal government, then it's hardly the Supreme Law of the Land, now is it? Fortunately, it IS the Supreme Law of the Land. Now if only we could get those in power to remember that little inconvenient (for them) fact.
Depending on their state constitutions, the states were free to establish a state religion (and some did), restrict the press, search without a warrant, regulate guns, etc. And they did these things.
After the ratification of the 14th amendment in 1868, the U.S. Supreme Court starting applying some of the Bill of Rights to the states in a process known as "incorporation". It wasn't until 1925, for example, that "Freedom of Speech" was applied to the states. "Freedom of the Press" followed in 1931. "Freedom of Assembly" in 1937. "Separation of Church and State" in 1947. "No Unreasonable Search" in 1949. And so on.
I have court cases which document each "incorporation". The second amendment has yet to be incorporated. The second amendment, today, only protects us from federal laws, federal infringement. States are guided by their state constitutions.
Didn't you ever wonder how some states allowed concealed carry and others didn't? If the second amendment applied to the states, that would be unconstitutional.
Now, since this is the first time we've corresponded, I've been nice. If you're going to respond with something along the lines of, "The states are violating the constitution ... they're infringing on our constitutional rights ... the Supreme Court is in collusion with the states ..." and other such unsupported garbage, I think we can just call it a day.