Replies

in 1982, the 7th Circuit ruled that "arms" do not include handguns, and now the cities of Chicago, Morton Grove, Oak Park, Evanston and Wilmette have used that to ban handgun ownership.

Was the 7th Circuit just applying the settled precedent in Miller? The one where a few Justices decided for all of us that the 2A protects only a collective right? The one I would like to see revisited?

Let me ask you a question...

What would you like to see happen now? The DC Circuit ruling can be left to stand, or the SC can hear it for the reasons offered by either side in the cert petition and cross petition, or they can choose their own reasons to hear it.

All of it is out of our hands now. The DC Court has ruled, and the SC might or might not take the case, and there's nothing any of us can do but to hope for our preferred outcome. I can't tell which outcome you prefer at this point.

So what, if anything, should the SC do with the case(s)?

"I can't tell which outcome you prefer at this point."

I would prefer the U.S. Supreme Court refuse the case, without comment, and let the DC Circuit decision stand.

If they hear the case I've already given you, twice, the outcome I prefer in posts #1032 and 1052. That outcome is not much different than if they didn't hear the case.

"Was the 7th Circuit just applying the settled precedent in Miller?"

Yes, they referenced the 1939 Miller case -- the part where the U.S. Supreme Court in Miller made reference to arms that had "some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia."

And the Miller case referenced the 1840 Aymette v. State of Tennessee case where the Tennessee Supreme Court made reference to arms being "any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense."

Then (and this is the strange part) the 7th Circuit, making a bold assumption based on those cases, concluded that "arms" referred to militia/military weapons! Where in the hell did they come up with that?!

Well, next thing you know, they're saying that average militia/military member doesn't use a handgun for the common defense and, therefore, it's not protected as an "arm". The insanity!

"The one where a few Justices decided for all of us that the 2A protects only a collective right?"

First of all, the Miller Court never did say whether it was a collective right or an individual right. They were silent on that issue.

Second, this is what could happen when only a few Justices decide for all of us what the second amendment protects.

Third, if any court declared a collective right, it was the 1840 Tennessee Supreme Court.