The author has analyzed more than 200 decisions of the federal and state courts -- all of them, to avoid the appearance of a bias. He also studied the social and legislative history of gun control, and how little effort was made to survey the data.
The author points out the strong influence that race-fear played in the passage of gun laws during the Reconstruction period. The "conservatives" wanted gun controls to keep weapons out of the hands of blacks. {Today, "conservatives" are dominated by the manufacturing factions and want all gun controls eliminated.}
The author is very focused, and uses a Socratic investigation methodology appropriate for a man who switched sides on the fairly polarized issue: He asks questions. Why was the NRA a major participant in the creation of the state gun control laws in the 1920s? Why does Vermont, alone of the States, prohibit concealed carry? What does the 2d Amdt prohibit?
The breakthrough for the author -- during a period in 1975-1980 when he had friends who were "murdered, stabbed, raped, beheaded {?!}, robbed, or beaten [xv]--when he read California Military & Veterans Code S.120. He realized he was a member of the militia, as the concept was originally intended.
Justice Scalia wrote the 5/4 majority opinion in District of Columbia vs. Heller, published in 2008. The opinion runs roughshod over the precedence--the two tier approach adopted by the Court when weighing claims with an individual's "fundamental rights" under the Constitution. [189] The majority not only failed to decide the nature of the right to gun access, but refused to adopt a standard of review for disposition of future disputes-- which are now guaranteed (full employment for government lawyers). The Opinion does refer to the author's recent works.