That is what I don’t understan. Ultimately, all your posts seem to point to a belief that the constitution of the united states does not limit local government as well.
Is this true?
False.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2264550/posts?page=226#226
That's a surprisingly difficult question to answer properly. In some ways, yes, in others, no. I quoted from Presser above, and will repeat because you seem to have scrolled past it.
I am also adding the part that the Circuit Courts cherry pick, without providing full context, in order to [wrongly] find the states may prohibit keep and bear arms under the authority of Presser.
We think it clear that the sections under consideration, which only forbid bodies of men to associate together as military organizations, or to drill or parade with arms in cities and towns unless authorized by law, do not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But a conclusive answer to the contention that [the second] amendment prohibits the legislation in question lies in the fact that the amendment is a limitation only upon the power of congress and the national government, and not upon that of the state. ...It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the [second amendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government. But, as already stated, we think it clear that the [law requiring a permit to conduct an armed public parade] do not have this effect.
The entire discussion in Presser, of the RKBA, is there because Presser argued that the first and/or second amendment embody a federal right to conduct an armed military parade in a public place without a local permit. The Supreme Court, in Presser, also addressed the first amendment, and it is similarly illuminating as to the extend and LIMIT of state power in that regard, and also placing the 1st amendment out of sight.