I haven’t read it yet either. I’m working on it…
Update 10:15 AM: I really like this point (page 5):
Petitioners’ position is that the Framers intended the Second Amendment to protect only possession of arms in connection with a well-regulated, i.e. government-organized, militia.
This presents us with an anomaly: an “individual right” that exists only if the government implements it by statue. Indeed, Petitioners argue that Respondent is himself outside the protection of the Second Amendment, because he is outside the Federal militia age range. […] Apparently this is a constitutional safeguard void where prohibited by law.
Update 10:35 AM: The “federalist mantra”, pages 21 and 22, is new to me. I like this. It so clearly shows the original intent.
Update 10:50 AM: Another thing that is new to me and that I really like (page 30): “Madison and the First Congress knew of the sensitivity of Americans on the arms issue. Calls for a right to arms had been voiced in five Conventions, compared to three calls for freedom of speech, and only one for a guarantee against double jeopardy.”
Update 2/11/2008: Here is the final version: 07-290_amicus_academicsforsecondamendment.pdf (232.09 KB)