My 2nd amendment argument

[f_townsend]

37. You keep saying "government"

As though there's no difference between the federal and state governments.

The 10A grants powers to the state government if those powers are otherwise unenumerated in the US constitution. It does not "prevent the government from creating new powers for itself that can encroach on personal freedoms".

For example, an individual of a state may claim the individual right to walk around nude in public wherever he or she goes, but the state government, elected by the will of the people -- i.e. "...or the people" -- has the 10A right to enact legislation prohibiting such a thing.

So no -- the 10A does not prevent the government from creating new powers that can encroach on unenumerated individual personal freedoms; as far as state government is concerned, it can do the opposite.

As far as the first two proposed amendments -- I mentioned them because you claim that the BOR has "everything" to do with individual rights, when clearly that was not at all its only purpose. The 2A, in fact, has everything to do with individual state rights (guaranteeing the right of individual states to host armed state militias, albeit constitutionally-bound to support the federal government), the collective state rights (state militias, pooled together to defend one another), and only barely individual rights (an individual constitutional right to keep arms -- but only if one actually participated in one's well-regulated state militia).

The 2A also had a lot to do with federal rights, because by guaranteeing that states could host and support their own respective well-regulated militias, presumably now better armed and better regulated by the 2A, the federal government and its laws would be better protected and enforced by those same state militias, by means of Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 & 16 (and the various Militia Acts).