[LS]

That certainly was never the intention of either the cities or the colonies, let alone the Founders, who NEVER intended, for example, that imbeciles/mental deficients would be allowed guns; or, in the South, slaves. I agree, though, with your general interpretation that the PREVAILING assumption is that the people should be armed. But as I say, there was abundant colonial case law that already had established towns' rights to regulate arms of all sorts within their borders.

[Shooter 2.5]

"That certainly was never the intention of either the cities or the colonies, let alone the Founders, who NEVER intended, for example, that imbeciles/mental deficients would be allowed guns; or, in the South, slaves.

Wrong. It was the intention of the law of the land that if a person was a threat to the community, they were not permitted to be free. At the end of their sentences, ex-prisoners had their property returned to them which included firearms. Slaves had no rights but free blacks had firearms.

[tpaine]

Congress is not mentioned in my 2nd Amendment. "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be ingringed" means no level of government can infringe upon the people's right. Not the feds, not the States, not counties and not cities. No one. -FreeTally

That certainly was never the intention of either the cities or the colonies, let alone the Founders, who NEVER intended, for example, that imbeciles/mental deficients would be allowed guns; or, in the South, slaves. I agree, though, with your general interpretation that the PREVAILING assumption is that the people should be armed.
But as I say, there was abundant colonial case law that already had established towns' rights to regulate arms of all sorts within their borders.

Here, imo, is the problem with your local control view of this issue. --
-- 'Regulate' does not mean prohibit. Reasonable regulations on public use to suit local conditions, certainly.
-- Total prohibitions on private possession? - Never; -- as per the 'Law of the Land', and 14th amendment.

[metesky]

But as I say, there was abundant colonial case law that already had established towns' rights to regulate arms of all sorts within their borders.

That would be British law then, would it not?