it is unanimous

There is something I want to clear up for all of the people out there who might be confused on this topic:
When it comes to the Supreme Court case of District of Columbia vs. Dick Anthony Heller, all nine Supreme Court Justices agree that the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution protects and preserves an individual right.
When it comes to the official Opinion of the Court, there can be little doubt as to this determination, as shown by the following quotes:

Putting all ofthese textual elements together, we find that they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation. This meaning is strongly confirmed by the historical background of the Second Amendment.We look to this because it has always been widely understood that the Second Amendment, like the First and Fourth Amendments, codified a pre-existing right.

…

It was clearly an individual right,having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia.

…

There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms.

However, when it comes to Justice Stevens’ Dissent (which was signed by all four dissenting Justices), people seem to get a little more confused, despite this quote being the first two sentences of his dissent:

The question presented by this case is not whether the Second Amendment protects a “collective right” or an “individual right.” Surely it protects a right that can be enforced by individuals.

Furthermore, Justice Breyer’s Dissent (also signed by all four dissenting Justices) has this to say on the topic:

The Second Amendment says that: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In interpreting and applying this Amendment, I take as a starting point the following four propositions, based on our precedent and today’s opinions, to which I believe the entire Court subscribes:

(1) The Amendment protects an “individual” right—i.e., one that is separately possessed, and may be separately enforced, by each person on whom it is conferred. See, e.g., ante, at 22 (opinion of the Court); ante, at 1 (Stevens, J., dissenting).

Regardless of the court’s decision concerning whether or not the District of Columbia’s laws violated the Second Amendment, all nine seated Justices agreed that the Second Amendment protects and preserves an individual right to keep and bear arms. They only differ in opinion on how the government can restrict that right.
(Thanks to Progressive Liberty Blog for pointing me in the right direction.)