Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: robertpaulsen
I received this post from you by mistake.

No, it was addressed to you specifically. You have a history on FR of derailing threads with that subject. Suffice to say that SCOTUS, in Miller, implied only militia-suitable arms are protected. Long arguments over whether sawed-offs meet that category have been had repeatedly without adequate conclusion; please, for purposes of this thread, accept that there is legitimate disagreement on the subject. If you seek resolution of that subject, please start another thread devoted to it.

222 posted on 07/17/2007 6:18:06 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (The color blue tastes like the square root of 0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies ]


To: ctdonath2
"If you seek resolution of that subject"

I don't. I'm perfectly content to leave it at "SCOTUS, in Miller, implied only militia-suitable arms are protected".

The poster to whom I was responding, however, equated Miller's short, sawed-off, double-barreled shotgun with the WWI Trench Gun. I thought that was disingenuous and needed addressing.

226 posted on 07/17/2007 6:43:26 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson