Now we are cookin with Wesson. I'm bettin folks with pre 86 models are lookin to sell now before the bottom drops out of their protected market value. It arguable that Heller tried to expand upon Miller but it's as a arguable it tried to hold millers line as well. Frankly, I'd bet many in the military could effectively argue that "sawed off" shotguns are indeed quite useful in warfare...
I see a avenue for stalling, with Holder jetting, but a bit of additional filing will clear that up. Government is now gonna have to face the fact - there is no way to defend bans on arms in the Face of Heller, which is CLEAR that Entire classes banned cannot pass muster. Bans on manufacture and even innovation fly in the face of the already established jurisprudence that tech advancement doesn't change what rights protect.
I'm imagining NICS overloaded and the next step suit as folks now wanting select fires figure out you gotta pay every year just to possess! Frankly, that can't stand either and government Has to face that too.
Gee why aren't the "leaders" leading the way on this? ahhh, but the REAL leaders are.....
I have always Believed/thought the 86MG Manufacture Ban needs to be challenged and Destroyed. From listening and chatting i find one of the biggest impedements are,besides the obvious weasels ATF with a New MG Amnesty Reg, that Class 3's and these Safe Queen Collectors! These folks are the Equivalent of Brown Gunners, leftist Elites, Hollywood Types, cling to a perverted belief. The Class 3's and Safe Queen collecting Elitest's have Gambled and now don't want there Ware's or Collections to be devalued abit by introducing More "Product" on the Market!! In short they are Traitors and Greedy Slime!! I would enjoy seeing Cable Companies, Airlines, Car Manufactures, Contractors, all Manufactures and FARMERs make a very small limited amount of there stuff...Lets watch Mcdonalds only make 1000 cheese burgers and charge 5million apiece for them. Lets watch Dodge make only 500 Ram pickups and charge 10million each. These Greedy little wanna be Bloombergs might as well goto the otherside, oh wait...They Have!!
Miller was a really poor precedent in so many ways. And there were so many opportunities to outright misrepresent what the court said. In the case of short barreled shotguns and 2A the following is of critical importance:
' "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158."
This means the in the lower court proceeding, none of the parties presented evidence on the issue of whether the military used a sawed off shotgun. When the court states it is not within "judicial notice" it means that whether the military used sawed off shotguns is not fact the court can entertain without processing it through the rules of evidence. An example of a fact the court grant judicial notice on would be something like "The court grants judicial notice that the sun rose this morning".'
Note "the absence of any evidence". The members of the court were well aware of the Army's use of short barreled shotguns in the trenches of WWI. But they were of the old fashioned opinion that U S courts must decide the cases before them based on the constitution, the law, and the evidence. Miller was dead, his attorney had never been paid and didn't bother to show up for the latter part of the court's proceedings, and the U S attorney presenting the case was under no obligation to present evidence for the Miller side. Hence, "Absent any evidence".
The problem with miller is the base premise. It was decided hinging upon well regulated militia - as in a collective right to serve in the military rather than a fundamental individual right disconnected from military service.
It's not "necessary to the militia" or necessary for the militia! Read plainly, ALL ARMS are protected. Remember now, CANNONS were part of what was being defended at Lexington. They weren't "designed to be carried by one person and used by one person". Millers concoction of useful in the military context was just a fabrication to justify a infringement. How ironic that today that very precedent set not only opens up sawed off shotguns but autos, grenades and even RPGs. The whole house of cards is falling apart - and it should because it's a bunch of lies imposed in order to usurp.
How would miller be decided today? Well, first, all parties WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE THERE but when it comes to substance the military's brass would have to argue that ALL arms, from handguns to artillery and from swords to bayos and 22s to 50 cal hand cannons are "useful". Single shot, bolt, lever, three shot burst and full auto? Yup, useful!
While contrived, I say we use THEIR tool of control foisted upon us AGAINST THEM. After all, down deep, the Second is about defense but it's about MEANS of that defense from ALL enemies both foreign AND domestic. We MUST have AT LEAST what the military has, at LEAST!!
Anonymous said- ' "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158."
If a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18" 'doesn't contribute to the common defense', then why are they possessed and used by The U.S. Marshal Service and other Federal agencies ? To my knowledge, unless things have changed, the Marshal's Service used pump shotguns with about 13" barrels.
6 comments:
Now we are cookin with Wesson.
I'm bettin folks with pre 86 models are lookin to sell now before the bottom drops out of their protected market value. It arguable that Heller tried to expand upon Miller but it's as a arguable it tried to hold millers line as well. Frankly, I'd bet many in the military could effectively argue that "sawed off" shotguns are indeed quite useful in warfare...
I see a avenue for stalling, with Holder jetting, but a bit of additional filing will clear that up. Government is now gonna have to face the fact - there is no way to defend bans on arms in the Face of Heller, which is CLEAR that Entire classes banned cannot pass muster. Bans on manufacture and even innovation fly in the face of the already established jurisprudence that tech advancement doesn't change what rights protect.
I'm imagining NICS overloaded and the next step suit as folks now wanting select fires figure out you gotta pay every year just to possess! Frankly, that can't stand either and government Has to face that too.
Gee why aren't the "leaders" leading the way on this? ahhh, but the REAL leaders are.....
I have always Believed/thought the 86MG Manufacture Ban needs to be challenged and Destroyed.
From listening and chatting i find one of the biggest impedements are,besides the obvious weasels ATF with a New MG Amnesty Reg, that Class 3's and these Safe Queen Collectors! These folks are the Equivalent of Brown Gunners, leftist Elites, Hollywood Types, cling to a perverted belief.
The Class 3's and Safe Queen collecting Elitest's have Gambled and now don't want there Ware's or Collections to be devalued abit by introducing More "Product" on the Market!!
In short they are Traitors and Greedy Slime!!
I would enjoy seeing Cable Companies, Airlines, Car Manufactures, Contractors, all Manufactures and FARMERs make a very small limited amount of there stuff...Lets watch Mcdonalds only make 1000 cheese burgers and charge 5million apiece for them. Lets watch Dodge make only 500 Ram pickups and charge 10million each.
These Greedy little wanna be Bloombergs might as well goto the otherside, oh wait...They Have!!
Miller was a really poor precedent in so many ways. And there were so many opportunities to outright misrepresent what the court said. In the case of short barreled shotguns and 2A the following is of critical importance:
' "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158."
This means the in the lower court proceeding, none of the parties presented evidence on the issue of whether the military used a sawed off shotgun. When the court states it is not within "judicial notice" it means that whether the military used sawed off shotguns is not fact the court can entertain without processing it through the rules of evidence. An example of a fact the court grant judicial notice on would be something like "The court grants judicial notice that the sun rose this morning".'
Note "the absence of any evidence". The members of the court were well aware of the Army's use of short barreled shotguns in the trenches of WWI. But they were of the old fashioned opinion that U S courts must decide the cases before them based on the constitution, the law, and the evidence. Miller was dead, his attorney had never been paid and didn't bother to show up for the latter part of the court's proceedings, and the U S attorney presenting the case was under no obligation to present evidence for the Miller side. Hence, "Absent any evidence".
What a hose job!
The problem with miller is the base premise. It was decided hinging upon well regulated militia - as in a collective right to serve in the military rather than a fundamental individual right disconnected from military service.
It's not "necessary to the militia" or necessary for the militia! Read plainly, ALL ARMS are protected. Remember now, CANNONS were part of what was being defended at Lexington. They weren't "designed to be carried by one person and used by one person". Millers concoction of useful in the military context was just a fabrication to justify a infringement. How ironic that today that very precedent set not only opens up sawed off shotguns but autos, grenades and even RPGs. The whole house of cards is falling apart - and it should because it's a bunch of lies imposed in order to usurp.
How would miller be decided today? Well, first, all parties WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE THERE but when it comes to substance the military's brass would have to argue that ALL arms, from handguns to artillery and from swords to bayos and 22s to 50 cal hand cannons are "useful". Single shot, bolt, lever, three shot burst and full auto? Yup, useful!
While contrived, I say we use THEIR tool of control foisted upon us AGAINST THEM. After all, down deep, the Second is about defense but it's about MEANS of that defense from ALL enemies both foreign AND domestic. We MUST have AT LEAST what the military has, at LEAST!!
Anonymous said-
' "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158."
If a shotgun with a barrel length of less than 18" 'doesn't contribute to the common defense',
then why are they possessed and used by The U.S. Marshal Service and other Federal agencies ? To my knowledge, unless things have changed, the Marshal's Service used pump shotguns with about 13" barrels.
You don't have to pay every year - the transfer fee is just that - a tax that's paid when the firearm is transferred/bought/sold.
Post a Comment