Not One Vote

The Heller decision is still reverberating and Glen Reynolds over at his Instapundit site makes the point

... What's most striking about Heller is that absolutely everybody -- majority and dissents -- says the Second Amendment protects an individual right.

Not one vote for the Schumer-Fienstien flat Earth militia only interpretation of the Second Amendment. WOW, that's going to hurt long after the dust settles. The 'collective rights' view has been the mainstay of gun-control groups for ages.

A point that was made in the Justice Scalia majority decision was

"It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause. But as we have said, the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. But the fact that modern developments have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right."

Specific reference to the current military weapon, the M-16, in common use by the militia. Here the Justice is arguing that military style weapons are attached to the individual right and may not be banned, even if those weapons are succeeded by far more potent weaponry.

I also note, repeatedly the majority decision refers to 'weapons', not duck hunting guns.