According to who? I don't find that in the text. All my copy says about possessing arms is "the right of the people...shall not be infringed." I defined terms in my last post. Do you disagree with the plain English definitions? The trench gun in WWI was 20" and had a bayonet lug. That certainly qualifies.
Hmmm. But if you saw 3" off that trench gun, it no longer is? How about modern shotguns used by the military that lack the bayonet lug, they don't qualify? One shotgun is and another isn't based on functionally insignificant differences? Is that from the Brady website or did your boss tell you that?
Oh, your last question One last ditty. Who decides if the weapon is suitable? The Miller case was remanded because the suitability was in question. Think about it. Who is in the only position to make that determination?, I reject the premise as I explained in my last post.Except to say the one in the best position to make that determination is the one who has to buy it, provide ammo for it and become proficient with it.
That phrase was from US v Miller.
"Except to say the one in the best position to make that determination is the one who has to buy it, provide ammo for it and become proficient with it."
So the U.S. Supreme Court remanded Miller back to the lower court to determine suitability of the weapon for a militia. In order to determine suitability, you're saying the lower court should ask .... Miller himself?
I don't think the Supreme Court would accept that.