Definitely grounds for appeal considering that the Heler decision even went so far as to mention that Miller may have to be revisted.
All of those on this thread and elsewhere who are worrying about this decision, or who are saying that Heller was a sell-out or a win for the gun-ban crowd are simply wrong - and should chill out a bit so that they can understand the process.
The law of the land in this regard is stated in Heller. Granted, it is not a decision that says "anyone can own any gun they want, no restrictions allowed," but it COULDN'T have been. IF the Supreme Court decides to take a case (and it only takes about 1% of those appealed to it), it only rules on the very narrow issues specified well by the Court when it grants Cert. There may be (and usually are) some comments in a decision that go beyond the issue(s) being decided, but these aren't law, only "dicta" or comments about the subject.
The Heller decision was quite specific that sport alone was not the only activity protected by the 2nd. In fact, not even serving in the militia (that is specifically mentioned in the 2nd Amendment) is the sole criteria. Self-defense is one that was specifically added (because it was at issue), and others were hinted at. It is my opinion tha the case at issue will (if appealed) be reversed at either the Circuit or Supreme Court level. Heller has been - as Miller was and continues to be - misconstrued and misinterpreted. A loss for our side at the level of some lower federal court is necessary to set things up for a Supreme Court appeal that will be granted Cert. I am quite certain that this Court will not uphold this type of decision. In fact, this particular case (again, if appealed) may even lead to a definitive opinion about the types of guns that are protected under the 2nd.
Very huge. It buttresses "the right of the people" in a way the left can't misconstrue.
To think an ammendment so simply worded could be misinterpreted by so many suggests we have a problem. Still, we're headed in the right direction and in a generation or two, we may be able to shoot back in life threatening situations outside our homes. Historians will look back and wonder why we didn't exercise our right sooner. And they'd be right: Why?