Not wrong.Wrong.
Mr. Miller was never convicted of anything.
Mr. Miller was murdered because the government took away the gun that he needed for self defense, making him the very first victim of gun control.
That's nice.Miller concerned the NFA’s prohibition of weapons determined to be dangerous and unusual, whose sole purpose was to facilitate criminal activity – such as a sawed-off shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18”.
A sawed-off shotgun can be easily concealed by a criminal to commit robbery or murder – because such a weapon has no relationship to legitimate militia service, its possession is not within the scope of the Second Amendment.
Conservatives try to use the ‘trench gun’ lie to undermine the authority of Miller – falsely claiming that sawed-off shotguns were used by the military and therefore are ‘legitimate’ militia weapons, when in fact nothing could be further from the truth.
Conservatives are either unaware that the M37 had a 20” barrel and was not a ‘sawed-off’ or ‘short barreled’ shotgun, or they are too dishonest to acknowledge this fact.
An Official Journal Of The NRA | Combat Shotguns Of The Vietnam War
Shotguns with familiar names—Ithaca, Remington, Winchester, Savage and Stevens—served American troops with distinction in the steaming jungles of Vietnam.www.americanrifleman.org
But none of it changes the reality that Miller was never convicted of anything, and was murdered because the government took away the gun that he needed for self defense, making him the very first victim of gun control.
That is incorrect. What he said is true.The ‘point’ you make is a lie.The point I always make to these anti gun nuts is that Miller affirmed that the Second applies to military type firearms. They don't want to hear that.
Thus, what he said is true.No one denies that Miller concerns the possession of military weapons.
The Miller ruling does however say that people have the right to have full-auto weapons, as well as things like grenades and bazookas.Miller reaffirms the fact that the Second Amendment is not ‘unlimited,’ that it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose – such as a sawed-off shotgun, and that the possession of such weapons which have no legitimate militia purpose is not entitled to Second Amendment protections.
Funny, weren't you just citing the Miller ruling, which agrees with everything that he said??Wrong – ignorant, idiotic, ridiculous, and childish.If a soldier would carry it in battle...I FUCKING GET IT TOO!!!
The gun control movement really needs to make up their mind. One moment they are supporting arguments that people have the right to have military weapons. The next moment they are decrying arguments that people have the right to have military weapons.
Or a childish progressive stomping his little feet in a temper tantrum. I hear a lot more complaints about Heller from the gun control side of the fence.In the coming decades Second Amendment jurisprudence will continue to evolve, resulting in a more comprehensive understanding of what regulations and restrictions are Constitutional and what are not.
But there will always be limits and restrictions based on what weapons are dangerous and unusual and what weapons are in common use – not based on what is possessed by the military or a childish conservative stomping his little feet having a temper tantrum.
If the courts stick with the philosophy of Heller alone, it is true that we won't get our machine guns. But it will still be a massive victory for gun rights. Many unconstitutional gun control laws will be struck down.
I'll be more than happy to take the enforcement of the Heller ruling as a first step and then push on from there to try to convince the courts to start enforcing the Miller ruling as well.
That is incorrect. So long as the courts are not enforcing the entire right to keep and bear arms, there is still something left to restore.And there’s nothing to ‘restore,’ the right exists as it always has, as determined by the Supreme Court: neither ‘unlimited’ nor ‘absolute.’