1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Colorado: "Gun-rights case sets up conflict"

Discussion in 'Legal' started by cuchulainn, Dec 30, 2002.

  1. cuchulainn

    cuchulainn Well-Known Member

    From the Rocky Mountain News


  2. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Frankly, I think the Supreme Court got it all wrong in United States versus Miller: a sawed-off shotgun certainly does have military uses.
  3. TallPine

    TallPine Well-Known Member

    Miller was a default; there was no opposing argument made.
  4. labgrade

    labgrade Member In Memoriam

    "Many people believe there is no conflict to resolve, and that the Supreme Court has already said there is no individual right to own a firearm. That belief rests on a 1939 case, United States v. Miller, which ruled that there was no Second Amendment right to carry a sawed-off shotgun, on the grounds that it was a weapon not suitable for militia use.'

    Not a bad enough write-up from the (more 'n more) liberal Rocky Mountain Snooze - in cohorts with the Denver (com)Post. Much better than expected.

    The author gets it, but not quite.

    Those that have actually read the decision, & know the history behind, only have a problem with the stupid ruling regards that specific weapon only.

    What's the real kicker, is the bogus decisions & "legal interpretations" since based on a "what we'd wish to feel it meant" mentality.

    A pox on all revisionist-stuff .... grrrr
  5. Gray Peterson

    Gray Peterson Well-Known Member

    It does, but it was not demonstrated to them that it was.

    The reason being that Miller was dead and the lawyer never showed up.

Share This Page