Actually, FC. The 2nd DOES specify a limitation to the actions of Congress. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That means Congress is LIMITED as to what it may do vis a vis the people’s right to keep and bear arms. In short, it is PROHIBITED from infringing (interfering) with that right and IMPLIES that NO ONE can.
John Bingham stated that " privileges or immunities of citizens" refers to the 1st 8 ammendments.
Here’s one of the times he did that:
“I hope the gentleman now knows why I changed the form of the amendment of February, 1866. Mr. Speaker, that the scope and meaning of the limitations imposed by the first section, fourteenth amendment of the Constitution may be more fully understood, permit me to say that the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, as contradistinguished from citizens of a State, are chiefly defined in the first eight amendments to the Constitution of the United States.”
According to him, that’s what the privileges & immunities clause in the 14th meant.
In Garnes v. McCann in 1871, one of the first cases to invoke the 14th amendment, the judge specifically mentioned the aforementioned clause as protecting enumerated constitutional rights.
If this wasn’t the intent of the amendment, why was there no outcry or appeal? It was a mere 3 years after the amendment was ratified.