"the 2nd amendment protects a legitimate individual right" - Barack Obama

[jimmy the one]

30. iconoclast's canard

iconoclast: One wonders why didn't you actually *quote* the dissent in Heller?
Oh, yeah- because it because it doesn't quite say what you claim it says:

iconoclast then cites justice stevens evidently conjecturing: The question presented by this case is not whether the Second Amendment protects a "collective right" or an "individual right." Surely it protects a right that can be enforced by individuals. But a conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right does not tell us anything about the scope of that right.

You take this paragraph out of context. You or some other pro gunner has tried this elsewhere, I wish you would stop it, it's sophomoric at best & rightwing propagangda at worst.

from your very cornell site, dunno how you missed it:
Held: 1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
>>> Stevens, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined.

This dissent called the majority opinion "strained and unpersuasive" and said that the right to possess a firearm exists only in relation to the militia and that the D.C. laws constitute permissible regulation.

So please, iconoclast, stop employing this canard.