Huebert (and Butler), I think the decision is much more of a mixed bag. I agree that it is good that the Court finally explicitly recognized what the Second Amendment has always meant. The four dissenting liberal “justice” are craven liars. They are not trying to be judges; it is obvious to anyone with a brain that the Second Amendment was meant to protect an individual right to bear arms from infringement by the federal government. And that is the problem with the decision. First, although the Second Amendment has not yet been enforced against the states via the dishonest … Continue reading The Great Gun Decision: Dissent