Actually, every lower federal court in every second amendment case (save one court in one case) has ruled that the second amendment protects a collective right -- ie., the federal government shall not infringe on a state's ability to form a Militia.
Now, it could very well be that all these lower federal courts are wrong, and that one day the U.S. Supreme Court will set them straight. But, given that the U.S. Supreme Court USES these lower court decisions to make their decision, I wouldn't count on it.
Actually, every lower federal court in every second amendment case (save one court in one case) has ruled that the second amendment protects a collective right -- ie., the federal government shall not infringe on a state's ability to form a Militia.
Ignoring that the 2nd clearly says it is the "-- right of the people --" which shall not be infringed --.
Nice spin paulsen.
Now, it could very well be that all these lower federal courts are wrong, and that one day the U.S. Supreme Court will set them straight. But, given that the U.S. Supreme Court USES these lower court decisions to make their decision, I wouldn't count on it.
Robbie me boyo, we are all well aware by now that you wouldn't raise a finger to protect our RKBA's.
actually there are upper level cases which are controling that hold to the contrary.
The first act of the Bush Attorney General was to hold that the second amendment is an individuals right.
The lower cases are just judges who are anti gun.
Bliss. Nunn. Cockrum. Chandler. Beard. Brown. Kramer. Emmerson.
Don't you ever get tired of spewing the same old lies?
One lower court decision, I think it was Toft, quotes from the syllabus of the Miller decision. The portion of the syllabus quoted does not, in fact, match what Miller actually says. The other lower-court cases in turn cite Toft.
Counting on a court to do anything right while people like Ginsburg are on it would be unwise, but a reading of what Miller actually says (joined with an understanding of what terms like "judicial notice" and "remanded" mean) makes clear that it doesn't really support the anti-gun position. If it did, why did the government offer Miller's co-defendent (Miller was deceased) Jack Layton a plea bargain for time served instead of prosecuting him?