Party Platforms, mid-19th century
An interesting historical point (thanks to Gene Volokh for the discovery):
In the mid-19th century, both major parties saw the right to arms as an individual right. The 1856 Republican platform protested at disarmament in Kansas, and the 1864 Democratic one at disarmanent in Maryland.
"Resolved: That while the Constitution of the United States was ordained and established by the people, in order to "form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty," and contain ample provision for the protection of the life, liberty, and property of every citizen, the dearest Constitutional rights of the people of Kansas have been fraudulently and violently taken from them.
Their Territory has been invaded by an armed force;
Spurious and pretended legislative, judicial, and executive officers have been set over them, by whose usurped authority, sustained by the military power of the government, tyrannical and unconstitutional laws have been enacted and enforced;
The right of the people to keep and bear arms has been infringed....
The right of an accused person to a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury has been denied;
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, has been violated...."
"Resolved, That the aim and object of the Democratic party is to preserve the Federal Union and the rights of the States unimpaired, and they hereby declare that they consider that the administrative usurpation of extraordinary and dangerous powers not granted by the Constitution — the subversion of the civil by military law in States not in insurrection; . . . the suppression of freedom of speech and of the press; . . . and the interference with and denial of the right of the people to bear arms in their defense is calculated to prevent a restoration of the Union and the perpetuation of a Government deriving its just powers from the consent of the governed. "
The point is simply that, in the period after the adoption of the Second Amendment, and immediately preceding that of the Fourteenth Amendment, there seems to have been no doubt that the right to arms was an individual right, and on a part with First, Fouth, and Fifth Amendment rights.