You miss my point. I agree with Heller. I support Heller. But the Court's minority view - that the 2A has nothing to do with protecting the individual RKBA outside the militia context - remains potent because a reversal of Heller becomes a likely reality once the Dems control the Presidency and the Congress.
The minority is just that. The minority. The dissenting opinion written by the people who drew the short end of the straw.
It's really kinda amazing to see you place such importance on the dissent on things you disagree with...like gun ownership. But you care not one whit about the dissent in things like Roe v. Wade or what Justice Scalia said in the dissent in Lawrence v. Texas when it's one of your pet Liberal causes.
But then again...that's par for the course for a Liberal.
What I am suggesting is that we do something about it, and take steps to keep Heller from becoming a political football like Roe v. Wade has been for 40 years
You're arguing for a fix something that isn't an issue or a problem. There have been far more Liberal courts that haven't overturned the 2A...even in the wake of the MLK and RFK assassinations the Warren Court NEVER considered what you're advocating for...and they'd have had a much better chance back then.
Roe has been a political football because new "rights" were created out of whole cloth where no right existed before. THAT is why it still a political football today.
In the case of the 2nd Amendment no new right has been created whether it's in Heller or any other lower court decision on gun ownership.
What has been reaffirmed by the MAJORITY decision...which is what you SHOULD focus on...is that the right to keep and bear arms AND the right to self defense are inexorably linked together and can not be separated.
Shall not be infringed. It's really that east and that clear and the Heller decision backs up that simple wording in the Bill of Rights.
Are you one who votes on the basis of appointing judges who will overturn the right to abortion? Well, congratulations, you're no different than millions who will be urged to vote Dem in 2020 in order to break the back of the 2A.
Nope I vote for judges...politicians in general ...hat will uphold the originalism text of the Constitution...not try to turn it into some "living document" in order to get around the restrictions it places on government to encroach on the rights of the citizens.
Court decisions tend to lack practical legitimacy when they do not have the support of the people.
And yet two of your pet court decisions don't have the support of the people...the MAJORITY of the people and yet you hold them up as black letter law that should never be challenged.
Codifying Heller will bestow that legitimacy, and make it that much harder for a future SCOTUS composed of Dem appointees from adopting the views of Justices Stevens and Breyer.
That's legalistic bullsh*t and you know it. Nothing could more plain and easy to understand than what is written in the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United States.
Your need to "codify" the Heller decision just opens it up to more political interpretation and the ability at some point for gun grabbers like yourself as a back to eventual gun confiscation.
Again you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and doesn't need fixing...certainly not by the Imperial Federal Government.
I see what is coming, folks.
What you see is a vast majority of people not bowing to the government and refusing all of the registration...insurance and "codifying" schemes you're pimping on here. They will simply not comply...myself and my family included.
And for someone who wants this country ruled by judicial fiat and the threat of legal action for non compliance...the thought of several million people who exercise their 2nd Amendment rights on a daily basis refusing to become a drone of the state scares the living crap out of you.