Replies

Go and actually read the Constitution.

I have. I've also read some 80% of Elliot's, quite a number of the letters the Founders wrote back and forth, and even some of the Con-Law text books of the time.

Here's a couple of interesting quotes for you:
"The whole of the Bill [of Rights] is a declaration of the right of the people at large or considered as individuals... It establishes some rights of the individual as unalienable and which consequently, no majority has a right to deprive them of." - Albert Gallatin, October 7, 1789

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. Art 6 para 2

The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to 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. William Rawle on the Second Amendment

Huh... sounds like maybe the BoR protected the Rights of Citizens from not only Federal infringement, but from State infringements where specified.

Using the First Amendments wiggle room of "Congress shall make no law" to assume that the Seconds "Shall not be infringed", without qualifier, doesn't protect an Individual Right from ANY infringement at any level kinda misses the point.

In fact, it kinda plays right into the anti-gunners hands. Yer' not a Brady Buncher are ya Fred? 'Cause you sure as hell argue like one.

Please read post 152. It applies to your silly arguments as well. And please note that neither earlier Federal Courts nor the current one -- including Antonin Scalia -- believes any of the nonsense you've posted here.

And please also actually read what Rawles wrote, in part: "No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to congress a power to disarm the people."

What does that say? What does it actually say? Nothing about anyone but the Federal Congress.

Incorporation is a real doctrine of the Federal Courts. If what you are arguing were true, it would not exist: there would be no need for Incoropration if the Bill of Rights applied to the States. But it did not, until July 9th, 1868.