You got that exactly right.. It was a very sad day the more and more I think about it.
In Missouri Our Consitution had the Bill of Rights as the very first thing not as Amanedments at the end.

It said :

” Right to keep and bear arms–exception.

Section 23. That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned; but this shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons”

and even the Concealed carry was taken care of in later legislation.

Now After McDonald . that means absolutely nothing with the FEDGOV being all supreme now.

A very sad day indeed.

All the other amendments have reasonable restrictions on them. So I actually really like the Heller decision and the McDonald decision because they put the Second Amendment in the context of all the other amendments… people from the gun lobby like to promote the idea that you have an absolute or god-given right to possess a gun. That’s clearly not true; your right can be restricted.
This decision also makes it clear that our rights are not natural and absolute. They are subject to the whims of the current members of the Supreme Court.

We might rephrase the Second Amendment this way:
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by the federal government, except by federal laws that infringe upon that right which are approved by the Supreme Court. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed by the state governments, except by state laws that infringe upon that right which are approved by the Supreme Court.

Get ready for broad anti-gun measures requiring training courses, gun and/or ammunition registration, liability insurance, fingerprinting, guns to be kept unloaded, trigger locks, gun registries, waiting periods, background checks, the banning of “assault” weapons, high-capacity magazines and limitations on the type and amount of ammunition.

I guess if they got away restricting the first amendment (Free speech zones) why should we expect the rest of our unalienable rights not to be transformed into privileges by a politician’s pen.

Brogan