[45Auto]

Interesting point. I agree that nearly all if not all, gun laws on both federal and state levels are unconstitutional in light of the 2nd (and the 14th); but I also bet that is one of the reasons the federal attorneys refused to prosecute these guys - they just don't want to open up a can of worms in terms of lower court precedent that might pave the way for a US SC review of the whole matter.

Be that as it may, I think the issue is nearly "ripe" for the SC, especially in light of the Emerson decision at least with regard to the goofy loss of Constitutional rights associated with the insane restraining order nonsense. There are now at least two conflicting rulings within the Federal Circuit Court system, dealing with the collective rights BS vs. the individual rights "standard model" , the 5th Circuit Emerson and another case from the (commie) 9th Circuit; I think its the 1992 case, "Fresno Rod and Gun Club v. Van de Kamp", the suit challenging the (first) rotten California AW ban. The 9th Circuit rejected the argument based on the 2nd, citing both Miller and the earlier Cruikshank decisions, both incorrectly, in my opinion.

[harpseal]

I am familiar with the ninth circuit ruling and agree very much on the misinterpretation of both the Miller</B and Cruikshank decisions. The matter is INHO ripe for the Supreme Court and I only hope they uphold the Constitution as written.

Stay well - Stay safe - stay armed - Yorktown