You are correct but if you read the Miller case, the wording suggests that the basis of the individual right to the 2nd Amendment is based on "weapons of the type of military service." This leaves out quite a large group of firearms types but ironically includes the guns that Congress in it's infinite lack of wisdom decided to ban in 1986. Go figure.
Mike
Yes, and I think that this aspect of Miller is entirely wrong for the reason I stated.
What would be interesting to know is what the "remand" in Miller actually did. This would appear to be a direction to the court of initial jurisdiction to try the case rather than dismiss on Second Amendment grounds.
Then it would appear that the prosecution, not the defense, would have the burden of proving that one element of the crime, that is possessing a weapon that is NOT of use to the Militia, had been committed. I don't see how the burden could fall on the defense.