bstrawse wrote:whiteox wrote:And without SAF, Heller and McDonald would likely never have happened. I don't know what the story was on why Gottlieb got on board with Manchin-Toomey but it failed. On balance, for me, having the Supreme Court say, UNANIMOUSLY, that we have an individual right to keep and bear arms outweighs his crackpot Manchin-Toomey background checks bill.
Unanimously? When did this happen?
b
Let’s start with some basic legal facts. In Heller, the five-justice majority led by Justice Antonin Scalia followed what is called the “standard model” of the Second Amendment—namely that the Second Amendment protects the right of all law-abiding persons to own, use and carry firearms for all legitimate purposes, especially for self-defense.
The four dissenting justices in Heller, led by Justice John Paul Stevens, instead preferred what is called the “narrow individual right.” Under this theory, individuals have Second Amendment rights, but only in connection with service in a well-regulated militia.
The Heller dissenters did not elucidate the scope of the right, except that it did not include owning a handgun for personal self-defense.
According to Justice Stevens, “The question presented by this case is not whether the Second Amendment protects a ‘collective right’ or an ‘individual right.’ Surely it protects a right that can be enforced by individuals.”
Basically, all 9 say the 2A protects an individual right, but the 4 dissenters essentially say that this individual right does not mean what the majority thinks it does.
So, unanimous? Yep, sort of...
source =
http://davekopel.org/2A/Mags/Collective-Right.html (though you can find this info in
a lot of places...)