Bingo, it's an encyclopedia. Chemerinsky's argument, for example, was considered by the Court and rejected. This is not an opinion piece, it's an encyclopedia entry on a specific court case. In this case the Court's decision is the Court's decision vis a vis this particular consideration. Apparently not only are you not an attorney, you're having some problems sorting out why an entry on one court case shouldn't be "balanced" in terms of argument. The reason why is that a decision was rendered. Reargue it somewhere else. This Court is the final arbiter of this Court's decision on this case. If it is reheard by the full Court, or the Supreme Court, you'll get another bite at the apple. You and SaltyBoatr, among others, apparently wish it were otherwise. Not only am I not some chickensh-t anonymous pundit, you can reach me at marty_eble@yahoo.com. Get a law degree or quite mucking the entry up. You can make a new entry on "Second Amendment Controversy" if you're that excited.