If you line up all the first ten Amendments and see to whom they apply to "the people" for the most part, and they seem to me to define mostly what the government in general should NOT do, as in limitations and other restrictions...
And that the right to keep and bear arms has always been that little wink wink, nod nod kind of thing that was suppose to be that check valve to remind the government that its not a good idea to press the issue too much against the individual (the people)...Thats what kinda pushes me to look at the "free state" phrase that way...
Yours and my "free state" condition of existence in this country is God given, not at the behest and dominance of an elected body...Sure we elect them and send them up there to do certain things we mostly agree with...Thats why we are not a democracy in it purest sense, we are a representative republic...And they should know the boundaries of their position...
I think over the years they have lost their way somewhat...
You nailed it with this comment:
Do you have the Second Amendment "primer" book???But the thing is, we still end up at the same place. The prefatory clause could just as well have read, "A well regulated militia being necessary for the formation of an excellent marching band....." and it wouldn't change the fact that the declarative clause says, ".....the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
My Dad gave me one for Christmas a couple of years ago...It has some fabulous english scholars who have broken down the wording on this and they left out some things, or maybe created some questions that need to have an answer...I still review it from time to time...
I highly recommend picking one up at a gunshow if you don't have one...At least you'll have a good read for a while...
You might see a few things I have since I started studying it a while back...At least it got me to thinking outside the box on this...