Gun Control & RKBA

icon: You forget that the findings in Miller were rendered moot by Heller. The same standard applies.....to all USSC decisions that are overturned by later decisions of same.

Dunno what you are saying here. The 1939 Miller decision re 2ndA was overturned? Are sawed off shotguns legal now? Jack Miller DID NOT violate the law when he carried a sawed off shotgun across state lines, because he had a 2ndA right to do so?

icon: That line of argument is no more valid than some regressives mourning over the 'lost' findings of Dred Scott or Plessy v. Ferguson

Except for one GLARING inconsistency in YOUR truth twisting argument, in that 2008 Heller did not overturn 1939 Miller, while dred scott was overturned by the 14th amendment, and plessy overturned by brown.
Indeed, Scalia cited Miller into his own Heller subversion of the 2nd amendment. Scalia did NOT oveturn miller, he cited it in support (cleverly ignoring the pro militia parts of miller):

Scalia citing Heller decison, citing gun lobby revisionist history: (f) None of the Court’s precedents forecloses the Court’s interpretation. Neither United States v. Cruikshank, nor Presser v. Illinois, refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes.

Scalia citing Heller, cont'd: The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/554/570/

icon: Also, your citation of Story is mere 'argument from authority'

I can understand your saying that (whatever you're twisting it to mean) since 'argumentation from valid reasoning' appears anathema to you.

Why is Heller such a radical departure from prior Second Amendment case law? .. the ruling in Heller represented a dramatic reversal of the Court’s previous interpretation of the Second Amendment. In United States v. Miller, the Court stated, in a unanimous decision, that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of” the state militia, and the Amendment “must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.”
In reliance on Miller, hundreds of lower federal and state appellate courts had rejected Second Amendment challenges to our nation’s gun laws over the last seven decades, making Heller‘s reversal of this interpretation a watershed moment in Second Amendment law.
lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/the-second-amendment/the-supreme-court-the-second-amendment/dc-v-heller/