The following is a link to most of the discussion on the case:
Scotusblog Index-to-Heller-Coverage/
I often wonder why it is so easy for many of the elitist leftists and their drones to understand the meaning of the word "people" in several other places in the Constitution, but when they get to the second amendment, they treat it like some Cryptic Satanic message that cannot possibly mean "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
There is actually one commenter that said
Individual-right advocates frequently compare it to the First Amendment. The difference is that the First Amendment protects speech, but the Second Amendment protects, in some form, the right to have a deadly weapon. “Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.”
Where do theses imbeciles come from?
UPDATE: (6 Apr 08)
It has been pretty quiet on the net about Heller v. Washington DC
A couple posts to note, however:
Sentencing Law and Policy Analysis
Intellectual Conservative Second Thoughts
UPDATE: (11 Apr 08)
I see there is a Washington Post article on Obama's position, or more like non-position on gun control. I see that he was for gun control before he was against it. Or so he says. Having lived in Illinois for many years (and never going back to that police state) I will say that his new position is temporary and just for the sake of getting elected. No one should be taken in by his false face he wares when saying he believes in an indevidual right. He says he taught constitutional law for 10 years. In all that time, he didn't cement his position on the 2nd Amendment? Horsehokky. He will revert back to being a gun grabber, immediately after the election, with more speed than the striking of a rattle snake.