[TheForge] Criminal Background Check: way OT: Corrected

[Andrew Vida]

Grant Marcoux wrote:
> Lads & Lasses:  Peter is correct on Miller v. US....the court disagreed with
> appellant's 2nd Amendment claim on the grounds that there was no connection
> between short-barreled shotguns and a "well-regulated militia"  However, the
> court blithely ignored the use of short-barreled shotguns in WW1 by US
> troops.  Interestingly, in the Miller case, neither side stood before the
> court to make oral arguments.

	Which is why the case was sort of screwed up.  Had Miller showed, a 
good case could have been made.  He disappeared into the mist, never to 
be seen again. :)

	Rulings aside, I can still pay my $9 and saw the barrels off my coach 
gun to 10".  Not that I'd want to do such a thing to so nice a gun, mind 
you.
> 
> The individual rights vs. collective rights arguments are a recent trend, as
> Miller dealt with the aspects of a particular weapon in militia service, vs.
> a collective vs. individual rights argument.

	That is because it is only recently that anyone was ignorant enough not 
to be able to properly interpret the amendment.
> 
> In Heller vs. DC, sadly, a bare majority found the 2nd Amendment to uphold
> an individual right.  In the dissenting opinion, Justice Stevens commented
> that even an individual right is a collective one, under certain
> circumstances.  Wow...kinda sounds like Orwellian double-speak to me.

	At least we know who the traitors and/or incompetents are on the SCOTUS 
bench.  Cold comfort, I agree.
> 
> Stay tuned

	Roger that.