that the true Constitution is the text and the precedents are secondary

at best. That premise, if followed consistently, would overturn many

settled and important principles of constitutional law — that is the

significance of the anomalies. For this reason, fundamentalism is very

much the exception, not the rule. Even the Heller Court, in the most

fundamentalist majority opinion in recent years, could not maintain its

fundamentalism consistently. Among other things, it went out of its

way to say that “nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt

on” many “longstanding prohibitions” — such as laws forbidding felons

or mentally ill individuals from possessing firearms, or laws

barring firearms from “sensitive places such as schools and government

buildings.”103 The Court gave no explanation for how these exceptions

fit with the “meaning of the Second Amendment” that it had

so painstakingly analyzed.104 But these exceptions are sensible, and

they are “longstanding” — the hallmarks of the common law, not of

fundamentalism.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3042804&forum_id=2#29166428)