tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post4491803228727068556..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: Essay question for Jim, using the Rule of Law, provide a basis for the Individual right..Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-24433411340710188222011-08-12T23:37:03.714+02:002011-08-12T23:37:03.714+02:00They probably would have ruled the same way FWM. ...They probably would have ruled the same way FWM. Miller had no defence presented to the court (defendent was dead when it was heard) so no evidence for the court to consider. SBSs were used by the military prior to Miller and still are today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-30183039026535963542011-08-12T23:27:33.797+02:002011-08-12T23:27:33.797+02:00FWM - don't you know that court rulings that L...FWM - don't you know that court rulings that Laci doesn't agree with are not legally binding. Just read her short novels below on why she knows best.Jimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-3221518648277196122011-08-12T23:12:12.386+02:002011-08-12T23:12:12.386+02:00I can do it:
I can own guns, Bill of Rights.
Hel...I can do it:<br /><br />I can own guns, <i>Bill of Rights</i>.<br /><br /><i>Heller</i> says it applies to the 2nd and <i>MacDonald</i> says the 14th applies it to the states.<br /><br />There, all done.<br /><br />Seriously though Laci, I have always wondered:<br /><br />Your favorite decision, <i>Miller</i>, basically said that The NFA 1934 did not violate the 2nd Amendment because of the collective rights militia notion, and, that short barreled shotguns could be regulated because they <b>were not</b> used by the military and therefore were not protected by the 2nd Amendment. So, my question is, what if Miller had been arguing a machine gun instead of a short barreled shotgun? Would the court have ruled the same? And if so, how could they since the whole argument was that the gun in question was not a military gun when there is no way that they could say that a machine gun was not a military arm?FatWhiteManhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08946272184958991397noreply@blogger.com