[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

...the language about the Second Amendment not conferring individual rights is from the Ninth Circuit, not the Supreme Court...

If the SCOTUS doesn't slap down the ninth's ruling, it is as if they are saying the same thing.

The lamest, stupidest second amendment case should be an open and shut decision in support of individual rights of the second.

ANY OTHER DECISION IS TREASON, PLAIN AND SIMPLE, NO MATTER WHO'S ON THE COURT OR WHEN IT'S HEARD!

[blau993]

If the SCOTUS doesn't slap down the ninth's ruling, it is as if they are saying the same thing.

Far from it.

When the Ninth Circuit says there is not an individual right conferred by the Second Amendment, it has an immediate effect in the sense that it upholds the California statute which spawned the litigation, and it has a future precedential effect in that it will be binding legal precedent on judges within the states that comprise the Ninth Circuit. It may also have precedential effect, as the National Review article points out, in other Circuits faced with the issue as a counter-balance to the Fifth Circuit decision that upholds Second Amendment individual rights.

A Supreme Court affirmance of the Ninth Circuit would settle the issue of interpretation of the Second Amendment for the entire country for at least the forseeable future.

I am not happy about what came out of the Ninth Circuit, but at least those of us who care about upholding Second Amendment rights are alive to fight another battle on another day. Hopefully, we will choose our battlefield and standard-bearer more carefully the next time out.