Cardozo Law Review has published an outstanding article by Dave Hardy titled "Ducking the Bullet: District of Columbia v. Heller
and the Stevens Dissent."
In this article, hardy proceeds to completely dismantle the Stevens dissent in Heller, brick by brick (or more like stick by stick, since there is no stone in the Stevens dissent) until there is absolutely nothing left but rubble.
He does it completely dispassionately, without bias, and extreme politeness; but he utterly destroys the dissent in Heller. For anybody who is debating that decision, it is a tremendous resource to problems in the reasoning and sources used in the dissent. It is also an interesting insight into how much the outcome was predetermined whether there was good law to support it or not.