But even this may be easily contested. As I asked earlier, do you suppose that the "universal understanding" is that the Fourth Amendment only prohibits "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, ..." from violation by Congress, and that violations of this right are perfectly OK when committed by lesser agencies, State or local?
Must I quote the Founders' own words regarding RKBA to convince you that the Barron v. Baltimore opinion is being interpreted in an overly broad manner here? I can, if you insist.
Give it your best shot.
"The first amendment to the Constitution prohibits Congress from abridging 'the right of the people to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.' This, like the other amendments proposed and adopted at the same time, was not intended to limit the powers of the State governments in respect to their own citizens, but to operate upon the National government alone." -- U.S. v. Cruickshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)"The Second Amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress." -- US Supreme Court, U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875), Presser v. State of Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886)