DC anti-gun law struck down

The Second Amendment came out on top this time. The majority opinion includes:

"This suggestion (by DC in support of the ban) is somewhat risible...

But this proposition assumes its conclusion, and we do not take it seriously...

Such outlandish views are likely advanced because the plain meaning of "keep" strikes a mortal blow to the collective right theory."

And:

But neither the Federalists nor the Anti-Federalists thought the federal government had the power to disarm the people. This is evident from the ratification debates...(p.37)

Onward:

There is certainly nothing in this history to substantiate the strained reading of the Second Amendment offered by the District. (p.38)

Miller's definition of the "Militia," then, offers further support for the individual right interpretation of the Second Amendment." (p.45)...

We do not see how one could believe that the First Congress, when crafting the Second Amendment, would have engaged in drawing such a foolish and impractical distinction, and we think the Miller Court recognized as much. (p.45)...

To summarize, we conclude that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. That right...was premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical governement....(p.46)

I wonder if it was those last five words which so upset the Washington Post et al. (See above)

Here is the pdf of the decision. I hope this stands.