Now that Scalia has died, are gun-lovers feeling...

[jimmy the one]

97. Miller spells out militia rights

sarisataka: Please cite The previous SCOTUS precedent the Heller rejected. ... Unfortunately it does not even support your case as it did not reject any individual right to carry. Miller was not an individual rights case. If you read the decision,

It did not reject an individual right to carry because state laws had changed dramatically by 1939 from original intent in 1791 writing of 2ndA. Miller did however, reject the individual interpretation of 2ndA.
Here, this is from the 1939 supreme court Miller decision. Read it over & over maybe 10 times, so that it sinks in. It does not refute any 'individual' right, but it pretty clearly spells out the MILITIA one:

The Constitution, as originally adopted, granted to the Congress power --To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.
With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such {militia} forces, the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174