The problem is the the judiciary falls into two camps, strict constructionists and those that feel the Constitution is a living breathing document that evolves with time and whose meaning changes with social interpretation. BTW, I call bull$hit on that school of thought.
Playing devil's advocate, I will make their argument for them. No Constitutional right is absolute, when they infringe upon other's rights they may be limited. The argument that you can not yell fire in a crowded theatre... well unless theire IS a fire in that theatre. A second case in point, the a$$hole "witness" who said he had details about the sniper in MD/VA/DC and turned out to be a liar. If free speech was abolute he could give that statement without repercussions, true or not.
As for firearms, in NYS if you are 21 and have a clean record you WILL be given a pistol permit. It will however be subject to restrictions. That is an entirely different debate and I am way too tired to delve into it now. From the liberals point of view, you can own that pistol, even if its usage might be restricted.
Yeah, its BS and we fight it, but its not looking good.
As for the federal Constitution being supreme remember that it was only through later SCOTUS rulings that the provisions of the Bill of Rights were applied at the state level. You're preaching to the choir, they shouldn't do what they do, but until a federal court has the stones to say no, they will continue to because too many courts have given the anti's a nod in the past.