This decision may have long-term benefits for Democrats. It may be the beginning of the end of the debate on guns in this country, with the defenders of the individual's "right" to bear arms effectively having won. The NRA and other pro-gun organizations and individuals will now launch a campaign, and likely a winning one, against numerous gun laws.  As they win and Democrats realize that this is no longer a fight worth fighting (I think most already have), particularly at the national level, gun owners may begin to feel secure enough to start voting for Democrats again on the pocket-book issues they also care about.

Just a thought.

"How dare you talk bad about my fanny pack!"

bhunziker: one could only hope. I am of a mixed mind about gun laws now, and fighting to keep them. We have more pressing matters. Yeah, I know a lot of people (especially children) will die who otherwise wouldn't have, but a Conservative supreme court makes the effort futile. I just have to teach my kids never to touch or come near a gun and hope that will be enough.  

bhunziker, very true in the long run.

A lot of working class conservative support comes from the gun issue and that might fade as the issue goes away. In the short run though the republicans might get a short boost because conservative voters will be more motivated than ever to want likewise justices.

I can tell you for one that I went through 20 years of schooling arguing with my liberal teachers who told me flat out that the Constitution has no right to keep and bear arms and that I should shut up about such antiquated notions. My patience paid off though...  

I think people of any age are safer knowing and respecting the capabilities of weapons than living in fear and ignorance of them. Abstanace doesn't work very well these days.

blackton writes, "Yeah, I know a lot of people (especially children) will die who otherwise wouldn't have ..."

See, I'm not sure this is true. A lot of states have liberalized (ironic word, that) possession and carry laws since 1990. Every time the scope of legal possession and carry, especially concealed-carry, has been expanded, liberals like me have worried that Wild West shootouts were going to become the norm and gun fatalities were going to skyrocket. Hasn't happened. Instead, gun violence has generally fallen where firearm regulations have been liberalized. Now, I am not convinced that there's a causal relationship -- I think the jury is still out on whether more guns in homes and concealed on persons in public causes a reduction in gun violence. But we can say with great confidence that letting more non-criminals possess and carry firearms, including handguns, won't lead to lots of new gun deaths.

Besides, the Court seems to have left open a lot of latitude for regulation, up to and possibly including licensing schemes. You can keep children safe from the guns in their own homes, and with the Heller decision, we can shift the debate from attempt to ban gun possession, which do not actually protect children, to attempts to regulate gun possession in ways that change the cultural norms, which can protect children. Heck, maybe we even need to go back to teaching gun safety in schools -- that's how we turned the tide on seatbelts, smoking, and drunk driving. Demystify firearms, and also turn America's children into tattletale nags on the subject of home firearms safety like we did back in the day for seatbelts, littering, and smoking, and we can make America's armed homes as safe for their residents as Canada's or Finland's.

Also, I would urge every liberal who has never handled or fired a gun to search out a local indoor range to take an introductory gun-safety class. The single biggest reason the liberal anti-gun movement has failed is that most gun-control advocates don't know what the heck they're talking about when they discuss firearms. Plus, target shooting is immensely fun.

I'm with Rhubarbs.  I was an anti-gun nut up until the concealed carry law was passed in Minnesota a few years ago, where I lived.  And violence didn't go up.  Nothing changed.

My instincts tell me that fewer guns means less gun violence, but being a liberal means I need to reevaluate things when the data challenges my assumptions.