That web is supported by the key deception of claiming that Miller supports a "collective right", a term which I am confident our Founders would not recognize, especially as applied to the Bill of Rights.
The anti-gunners future hangs on a slender thread that will be forever broken by a Supreme Court decision affirming Parker. If the Supremes rule that the right to keep and bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment is an individual right, then who can make the claim that it is not "fundamental", given its prominent position in the Bill or Rights.
That fundamental nature triggers the protection of the Fourteenth Amendment. The rest is just a mopping up operation of challenging the nationwide tyranny of shifting the burden of ineffective "crime-control" onto the backs of law-abiding gun owners.
These men claim that 'We, -as a society', decide which rights we will protect --- And if 'We' choose not to protect your right to do [whatever], so be it. If and when a majority of the people decide that we should protect a right, then we will. Given that we're a self-governing nation, there's nothing to stop the majority from deciding this.
--- For instance, if there's nothing in a state constitution about the right to keep and bear arms [and States can change their constitutions by super-majority decisions], - then --- States can ban all guns if they so chose.