[vette6387]

“How does that come to pass?
By amendment?
I am a big fan of an article V convention.”

I actually haven't thought out that part. But we do have the CFR that has laws and regulations ad nausium, so if the SCOTUS simply said that the 2A means exactly what it says, and that the states are proscribed from any legislation that infringes the 2A I don't see it as a particularly difficult thing to legislate. But the SCOTUS can't keep picking at the 2A like a scab. They need to provide a “final answer,” and then drag any recalcitrant states or in the case of a city Washington DC or Chicago in front of them and tell them to cease and desist with any and all “work around legislation” that has as it's intended goal, the flauting of the Court's decision.

[Repeal The 17th]

the SCOTUS have actually been very supportive of the 2A in their decisions over the last couple of years.

[MaxMax]

Thinking about it, what can the Gov really do to a state who does not comply
with the Constitution while the citizens of said state continue to vote
those people into office? I've never seen anybody arrested for Treason for
ignoring the Constitution, but I would like to!

What's in the law to actually stop states from breaking the Constitution?
Like DC and open carry that was ruled on, they just ignored the ruling
and reinvented a new law.