Here's a link to the Register's editorial on the Supreme Court's decision to take up the case in which residents of the District of Columbia challenged that city's virtual ban on owning handguns (and requirement that any weapon kept in the home be rendered effectively non-operational). The high court could still sidestep the central issue -- whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right or a collective right (i.e., just for members of a militia) -- by deciding that since DC is a federal enclave rather than a state, it's decision applies there alone, and not to the states. But that still wouldn't resolve the disagreement among circuits as to the meaning of the right to keep and bear arms. Case will probably have oral arguments in March, decision handed down toward the end of June.
Congratulations to Bob Levy, who has masterminded and financed this case. He's the farthest from a gun nut you can imagine -- doesn't own a gun and doesn't expect to, though Florida and North Carolina, where he has homes, would both be friendly toward gun rights. He thinks the issue is about freedom, even freedom for others to exercise a right he doesn't expect to exercise. I'm proud to know Bob.