No it’s not. He clearly stated what he meant by regulation and he listed the specific instances.
It is not what you’re claiming. Not even close...no matter how much you wish it is.
And there you go again trying to toss a flaming straw man into a subject when you’re losing the debate.
Try and focus please.
Those instances he cited were by way of example, not of limitation. Read it again, sir. That's not to say that Scalia would not have vigorously protected the individual RKBA against unreasonable regulation (say, e.g., an "assault weapons" ban), but the proposition that constitutionally secured rights are nevertheless subject to reasonable regulation is not controversial.
Bottom line is you don't see the forest for the trees. Be thankful the Court recognized your individual RKBA. I'm afraid it won't be that way for long - in part because of extremists whose view of the 2A is so absolute that the community is hamstrung in addressing the current epidemic of gun violence.