Rank constitutional dishonesty. Such as every case that purports to cite Miller.
I think much of the anti-Second Amendment crowd were very concerned that the Heller decision from the Supreme Court might overturn the Miller decision. They thought this might occur because they believed the lower court lies that the Miller decision recognized a "collective right" for states to form militias.
Much to their surprise the Heller Court didn't overturn Miller. That is because Miller doesn't say what they think it says. The Miller decision actually established that the keeping and bearing of arms by the people is protected if those arms are useful to a militia. The Heller decision then expanded that concept by ruling that the keeping of arms in the home by the people is protected if those arms are useful for self defense.
The more recent Caetano decision outlined the reasons why Massachusetts was wrong to outlaw possession of a stun gun. Oddly missing was any mention of the fact that the person charged was evidently carrying it outside the home.