[rantingredneck]

Is it just me (I haven't re-read Heller in awhile), or does this opinion go much farther along the resisting government tyranny train of judicial thought than Heller? What I remember of Heller, they stuck their toe in that pond but relied much more heavily on the right of personal self-defense in their opinion. This one seems to get very deep into colonial and reconstruction era history of government oppression and the people's right to resist it.

Could this not have greater implications down the road (as precedent language for later litigation) for repeal of laws banning specific types of weapons that would be most useful to resist a modern army? (AWB (as applied to states)/NFA implications?)