Glenn Reynolds vs. Adam Winkler on "reasonable regulation"
Some months ago, Prof. Adam Winkler of UCLA published Scrutinizing the Second Amendment, arguing that even with an individual right, almost all gun control measures would pass muster: review would generally be rational basis, and most would pass even strict scrutiny. He relies largely upon State case law.
Prof. Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds of U. Tenn. has responded with Guns and Gay Sex: Some Notes on Firearms, the Second Amendment, and "Reasonable Regulation.". Reynolds argues that Winkler overlooked a significant line of case law that held keeping arms was an absolute right, while bearing them was subject to regulation (and later case law interpreted keeping to include much carrying, as well). He goes on to suggest that if courts merely took the expressly-guaranteed right to arms as seriously as they take gay sex, which has no such guarantee, they would have to conclude that reasonable regulation was very narrow indeed. If they do not, then their credibility will be seriously damaged: it would be apparent that the interpretation was driven by the desired outcome.