Gun Control & RKBA

but still wrong. It was never established and the "accepted view" existed only in the minds of a few academics since Miller. That was the government's argument in Miller, but the court rejected it.

What Miller REALLY said was that registering sawed off shotguns did not violate the 2A because it was not a military weapon. It was a 8-0 vote only because Miller was dead and there was no counter argument and no briefs on his behalf. It is a very poor choice. If your claim was true, then why didn't they simply ban machine guns and sawed off shotguns instead of the high transference tax and registration? Because they know a ban would be struck down.
Miller did not say only militias were protected, only ownership of military weapons were protected. If it were a Thompson SMG or a BAR, the ruling might have been quite different. That is why both sides claim that Miller was a victory for their side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller
http://www.law.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/ECM_PRO_060964.pdf
http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=4742
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/307/174
Before Miller, look up Nunn v Georgia.

Since I didn't cite an advocacy group from either side, like the NRA, can you do the same? I'm thinking not.