[Aguila Blanca]

Originally Posted by 44 AMP

Could someone explain to me, if, and how, the

decision negates our right to militia weapons??

It doesn't, but lower and appellate courts are using it to do so. The problem is that Mr. Justice Scalia wrote that the "core" right protected by the Second Amendment is a right to have an operable firearm for self defense. He also wrote that this right is not connected with service in a militia.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf

1.
The Second Amendment protects
an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in
a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such
as self-defense within the home.

3. The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to
self-defense) violate the Second Amendment. The District’s total ban
on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an
entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelming ly choose for the
lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scru-
tiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this
prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense
of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional
muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the
home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible
for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and
is hence unconstitutional. Because Heller conceded at oral argument
that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbi-
trarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy
his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement.
Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment
rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and
must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

SO now the anti-gun side has done an about face. Now, instead of claiming that we are only allowed to own guns that have a military usefulness, they're saying we CAN'T have any guns that are military-ish, because the 2A "only" protects a right to keep a hand gun in the home. That's not actually what Heller said at all, but that's what they're saying it said.