• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

On Miller vs. US and its implications

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
When I read parts of Miller and discussed it with a co-worker (quite knowledgeable) back in the early 90's, the meaning was not what the anti groups present. The decision was based upon what was believed to be a firearm which would have purpose and valid use as a military arm for militia. The court did not find that a "sawed off" shotgun fit this description. If one were to take the court at its decision, and more importantly the Founders views, then arms which are subject to military use must also be available to citizens for their own use (arms meeting the definition common in the late 1700's). So Miller had nothing to do with the collective concept nor did it have anything to do with gun control.

Now I could be wrong about this, but that was, and I suppose still is, my understanding of this case. The book, "Unintended Consequences" goes into some depth about this case and the surrounding events.
 
Last edited:

DevinWKuska

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
300
Location
Spanaway
Hmm personally I cant think of any "good" reason to own a sawed off shotgun unless your intent is to spray a crowd, or execute someone from 3 ft away. However, although I firmly believe in the 2A, I would be concerned if all small arms that the military used were legalized. The thought of a few BG's running around with a .50 cal machine gun is disturbing.

Keep in mind though that when the 2A was created there were only rifles and a very few handguns. They did not mean/intend/ or even know about some of todays brutally efficient firearms such as the 20mm rifle. I can only hope that if they had knowledge of todays arsenal limitations would have been set forth. In the time of the Civil War the differance between the military's weaponry and the weapons available to the general public varried very little barring of course the large cannons. To date I am still under the impression that the general populace were not in possesion of cannons(although wouldnt that be a cool lawn ornament?).
 

RedRuger

Regular Member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
59
Location
, Louisiana, USA
Miller vs US

We need to remember that when Miller vs US was argued before the Supreme Court that only the Government was represented. Miller were nowhere to be found and Miller's lawyer was unable to argue the case due to time and money constraints.

With no evidence to the contrary; the court had no choice but to accept whatever BS argument that the government put forth.
 

bom1911

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2009
Messages
114
Location
Chesterfield County , USA
It seems to me I've read some rubbish from someone in the Brady crew arguing that the 2A only applies to flintlocks. I guess some buy that.

I can think of a great reason to own a sawed off shotgun. It's not as long as a long shotgun.
 
Last edited:

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
We need to remember that when Miller vs US was argued before the Supreme Court that only the Government was represented. Miller were nowhere to be found and Miller's lawyer was unable to argue the case due to time and money constraints.

With no evidence to the contrary; the court had no choice but to accept whatever BS argument that the government put forth.

Do you have something new to contribute? From the post: "With no representation to the Supreme Court, Miller and Layton’s case was argued entirely by one side – the government’s. Knowing this, the Supreme Court’s decision was not surprising:"
 

Tawnos

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Messages
2,542
Location
Washington
Hmm personally I cant think of any "good" reason to own a sawed off shotgun unless your intent is to spray a crowd, or execute someone from 3 ft away. However, although I firmly believe in the 2A, I would be concerned if all small arms that the military used were legalized. The thought of a few BG's running around with a .50 cal machine gun is disturbing.

Keep in mind though that when the 2A was created there were only rifles and a very few handguns. They did not mean/intend/ or even know about some of todays brutally efficient firearms such as the 20mm rifle. I can only hope that if they had knowledge of todays arsenal limitations would have been set forth. In the time of the Civil War the differance between the military's weaponry and the weapons available to the general public varried very little barring of course the large cannons. To date I am still under the impression that the general populace were not in possesion of cannons(although wouldnt that be a cool lawn ornament?).

Hmm personally I cant think of any "good" reason to own blog publishing software unless your intent is to libel a party, or incite treason. However, although I firmly believe in the 1A, I would be concerned if all publishing abilities that the press used were legalized. The thought of a few idiots running around spouting their opinions is disturbing.

Keep in mind though that when the 1A was created there were only printing presses and hand-written pamphlets. They did not mean/intend/ or even know about some of todays brutally efficient publishing means such as the internet. I can only hope that if they had knowledge of todays speech capabilities limitations would have been set forth. In the time of the Civil War the differance between the press's or government's publishing capability weaponry and the capability available to the general public varried very little barring of course the large for-hire presses. To date I am still under the impression that the general populace were not in possesion of printing presses (although wouldnt that be a cool lawn ornament?)
 

DevinWKuska

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
300
Location
Spanaway
Hmm personally I cant think of any "good" reason to own blog publishing software unless your intent is to libel a party, or incite treason. However, although I firmly believe in the 1A, I would be concerned if all publishing abilities that the press used were legalized. The thought of a few idiots running around spouting their opinions is disturbing.

Keep in mind though that when the 1A was created there were only printing presses and hand-written pamphlets. They did not mean/intend/ or even know about some of todays brutally efficient publishing means such as the internet. I can only hope that if they had knowledge of todays speech capabilities limitations would have been set forth. In the time of the Civil War the differance between the press's or government's publishing capability weaponry and the capability available to the general public varried very little barring of course the large for-hire presses. To date I am still under the impression that the general populace were not in possesion of printing presses (although wouldnt that be a cool lawn ornament?)

touche'!

Hmm your posting looks familiar!:lol:
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
To date I am still under the impression that the general populace were not in possesion of printing presses (although wouldnt that be a cool lawn ornament?)

Your entire post was very nicely done, Tawnos! Great tongue-in-cheek rebuttal to the anti-gunners' sentiments.

As for personal printing presses, actually, I do have one, and it'll even print on both sides! My HP LaserJet 1320 will print up to 22 pages per minute, which is a darned sight faster than Benjamen Franklin's presses... Combined with a scanner and a word processor, I can write, print, and post (via thumbtack on the bulletin board next to our apartment complex's mailboxes) a single-page bill (public letter), complete with a picture, in less than 10 minutes.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,853
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
Miller is one of the most misquoted, misunderstood decisions of all time. It is not anti-2A, and is extremely narrow in scope. It is also poorly written and subject to he said-she said. Thankfully, it is now obviated as to its most damning anti-RKBA application.
 
Top