The Heller decision's "weak point" is the infamous "Laundry List" of prohibitions which are presumptively valid under this decision's dicta...
"Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons."
The implication is that, on its face and with a liberal reading, an AWB would pass muster presumptively. It's almost 90% certain to survive a challenge, even under a Miller Test due to the present composition of the Court.
The further implication, though not expressly stated, is that the test standard is that of a Rational Basis (which, really, is no test at all)... meaning the Government need only have a rational excuse (not one empirically proven, not the best excuse, not a comprehensive excuse, etc.) to have a constitutionally valid law. If the Court can be pushed to state that the test is something higher, that shifts the burden onto the Government to have an empirical or closely tailored basis for their measures, then you'll have a better chance of seeing something like an AWB struck down.
Since the Court didn't get to the issue here, it may be quite a long while before they decide to take it on. They might not be expressly asking for empirical data, but they might be seeing how things shake out in a practical sense first... running the clock on public opinion such that the next time the issue comes around, American is less reticent to part with their guns.
So the task is the same... "convert" and mobilize your friends and neighbors to be a substantial faction if not a plurality/majority... rather than pin our hopes on a Court to oppose the general will of the country (if most people want gun control in this country- the fault lies with us as passive owners, not with a Court who's jurisprudence may include accommodations for proposals with public mandates).
