Just to make the record clear, I did not say the 2nd Amendment does not protect the individual's right to bear arms. I think that history supports the decision of the SCOTUS, although an alternate reading would be supportable.
My beef is that the Scalia opinion writes into the amendment a whole array of qualifications, exceptions and understandings that would, if the opinion went the other way, be called judicial activism and judicial legislating.
You are correct, Phil. The Second Amendment restricts the Federal Government from involving itself in the matter -- regardless of the use of the unconstitutional subversion of the interstate commerce clause. Scalia and Stevens (to differing degrees) both try to preserve an authority that the establishment does not have.
Yours,
Issodhos
