That's not what the courts have found, I'm afraid. The misconception about it being for states only is from the clause concerning well-armed militias being goo

That's not what the courts have found, I'm afraid. The misconception about it being for states only is from the clause concerning well-armed militias being good for security, that wasn't a scoped restriction concerning that right. During the time following the articles and the constitutional convention, most eligible civilian men were obligated to keep arms, not just ones in a militia or the military. To believe the same people who legislated this had just gotten done signing a constitution that obviated all civilian gun ownership save for those in a militia is ludicrous and painfully unaware of the history. So the wording goes, >the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed If you don't like it, get the constitution amended. At least the anti-alcohol prohibitioners had enough self-respect not to try to sneak through the back-door. Otherwise, suck it up. It's the law of the land. Also, McDonald restricted localities and states from infringing on the individual right to bear arms as much as the Federal gov't had previously been restricted, so it's no longer possible to stuff a city council to get guns banned.