I would like to thank David Yassky for his well-written response to my article. In my article in this symposium, I suggested that readers who think that the 1939 Miller case was the beginning and end of the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence should broaden their view by studying everything that the Supreme Court has said about the Second Amendment. David Yassky, in reply, gives both me and the Supreme Court too much credit for creativity, and for inventing novel approaches to the Second Amendment. Let’s start by discussing the credit that I do not deserve.