The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment does constrain the State and local governments as it does the government of the United States. Naturally, the liberals disagree. The 5-4 decision is here.
The dissent, concocted by Justice Stevens, is the usual bunch of liberal nonsense:
When a federal court insists that state and local authorities follow its dictates on a matter not critical to personal liberty or procedural justice, the latter may be prevented from engaging in the kind of beneficent “experimentation in things social and economic” that ultimately redounds to the benefit of all Americans. New State Ice Co. v. Liebmann, 285 U. S. 262, 311 (1932) (Brandeis, J., dissenting). The costs of federal courts’ imposing a uniform national standard may be especially high when the relevant regulatory interests vary significantly across localities, and when the ruling implicates the States’ core police powers.
Of course, he did not feel that way in Laurence v. Texas, nor does he feel that way about Roe v. Wade.