Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Fudds vs US vs Miller

Supreme court decision in US vs Miller ruled that only militia firearms are protected under the 2A. Your deer rifle or bird shotgun could go away with the stroke of a pen without constitutional protection. May be time to strongly remind those straddling the fence what is really at stake.

From here-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

"The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon."

Might want to compare that with the Heller Decision.

Is this the same Miller case that was decided in 1939? Heller better describes the rights US citizens actually have.

Is that the 5-4 case? The constitution was upheld by one vote?

Yes. IMO, the only thing surprising about Heller was that it had 4 votes dissenting. Nevertheless, it's a Supreme Court decision, with this to say:

Held:
1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a
firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for
traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
[emphasis added]

While hunting is not explicitly mentioned, it's certainly a traditionally lawful purpose.

It's interesting to see how Miller was handled in Heller. According to SCOTUS, most people were misinterpreting Miller.

"shall not be infringed" is pretty clear. 2A is a right, however an "individual" can lose their right to own a firearm, example; a convicted felon.
Why the highly educated and supposedly intelligent members of SCOTUS can't see or say that clearly is a mystery.