[neverdem]

Here's a long, moldy oldy. Happy New Year!

[neverdem]

BANG!

[ozzymandus]

I remember Harlon B. Carter. Good man, RIP.

I'd bet that figure of 150 million guns in private hands has probably doubled in the last 30 years. I know collectors who own hundreds of guns, and lots of non-collectors who own a dozen guns. It doesn't take long to acquire a safe full.

[pissant]

any body ping the guy yet?

[Joe Brower]

[NonValueAdded]

Bump!

[absolootezer0]

good article.. and its the same age as I am (feb '78)

[PeterFinn]

“GOD GUNS & GUTS MADE AMERICA FREE”

And atheism, gun control, and "tolerance" will make us slaves.

[ZULU]

Hey!! They stole part of my tagline!!!!

Great article!!!

Remember: Friends don't let friends vote for JulieAnnie!!!!

[sig226]

"The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled only once in this century on questions of law arising from the Second Amendment. In United States v. Miller, heard in 1939, the court restricted its opinion to the narrow issue of whether, under the National Firearms Act of 1934, a sawed-off shotgun could be considered a proper weapon of the militia. The court opined: “[W]e cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense.” In a recent pamphlet on the Second Amendment, the NRA said of the Miller decision: “The High Court was unaware of the fact that some 30,000 shotguns, including a great number of ‘sawed-off’ shotguns, were purchased by the U.S. Government for use in World War I as ‘trench guns’.…”

The Supreme Court absolutely did not say that and Mitchell should never have used that statement in that way in this essay.

The Supreme Court said, "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument."

They said this because Miller never argued a case at the appellate level. The apeals court in Arkansas never asked for any argument from Miller, they agreed with his brief and ruled that the National Firearms Act was unconstitutional on its face. There was no evidence submitted to the court in Arkansas for the Supreme Court to consider. It was a summary judgement.

The Supreme Court did not render an opinion at all in this case. What they ruled was: "We are unable to accept the conclusion of the court below and the challenged judgment must be reversed. The cause will be remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded."

Remanded means that the case was sent back to the lower court to for another hearing.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=307&invol=174

[Chode]

GUN PORN...!!!

[Nancee]

"...the U.S. Constitution gives them a personal right to keep and bear arms."

No question about it! Thanks for a great article!!

[woollyone]

...Rugers and Lugers and Colts...oh my!

[traviskicks]

"The greatest obstacles, he dourly observed, were the “politically devastating lobbying activities of hunters and sportsmen, spearheaded by the National Rifle Association. …"

lol