Most States that allow concealed carry consider it a privilege. The only one that does not is VT. There it is simply recognized and treated as the right it is. The fact that various States and Congress have ignored the fact that CC is an individual right covered by the 2nd Amend, does not alter, or eliminate the Amned, or it's meaning.
Due process refers to following the rules of order in producing, and prosecuting law. It does not refer to, or mean the law itself is Constitutional. Equal protection refers to the application of law. It means any particular law must apply to everyone, with no exceptions. So for instance a law against murder must apply to everyone. By virtue of the 14th, the 2nd Amend must apply to all jurisdictions with legislative and rule making power.
The SCOTUS has already said that the right in the 2nd Amend is an individual right and it is the people's right. Just because some due process was followed, does not mean any law is Constitutional. That was determined in Marbury vs Madison. Due process also does not determine equal protection. That was manifest in Plessey vs Ferguson and that wasn't to begin being corrected until Brown vs Board of Ed and following cases. The fact that equal protection is not obtained and an Unconstitutional law is allowed to stand, does not establish, or render any validity to claims of equal protection, or Constitutionality, only rational examination can determine that.
A good example of rational examination and how the reality of Constitutionality is not determined simply by Court decree, can be seen in Roe vs Wade. The SCOTUS used the right to privacy found in the 4th Amend to overturn a State law. The 4th Amends prohibition only refered to unreasonable searches and sezures, not that the right to privacy was absolute and prevented any particular law from being established. By the Court's logic, laws against murder done in privacy are unconstitutional. Now the right to privacy is simply applied in an arbitrary fashion to protect some activities, regardless of whether they're even done in private.
"EVERY SINGLE FEDERAL COURT IN EVERY SINGLE GUN CASE BEFORE IT (save one) HAS RULED THAT A) THE SECOND AMENDMENT ONLY APPLIES TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT"
Then why has Congress violated the 2nd Amend?
"IT PROTECTS THE RIGHT OF THE STATES TO FORM ARMED MILITIAS."
The Constitution doesn't say the right of the States to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It says the right of the people shall not be infringed. Those are the same people referred to in all the other Amends. Once before men were expluded from being considered as a person and member of "people", the people who are individuals the Bill of Rights was intended to protect.
"The words 'people of the United States' and 'citizens' are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the 'sovereign people,' and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of this sovereignty. The question before us is, whether the class of persons described in the plea in abatement compose a portion of this people, and are constituent members of this sovereignty? We think they are not, and that they are not included..." (Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 [1856])
That's your answer? The various states and Congress (and I assume the courts are also complicit) are wrong and they're violating the constitution.
Well, sure, why didn't I think of that!