New paper on US v. Miller

[Librarian]

For those who are interested, the paper is here

THE PECULIAR STORY OF UNITED STATES V. MILLER
Brian L. Frye*
This article provides a comprehensive history and interpretation of United
States v. Miller, the only Supreme Court case construing the Second
Amendment. It presents evidence Miller was a test case designed by the
government to test the constitutionality of federal gun control. It shows the
holding in Miller is narrower than generally assumed. It argues Miller adopts
neither the individual nor the collective right theory of the Second
Amendment. It suggests the Supreme Court’s pragmatic, deferential approach
in Miller remains appropriate.

Hat tip to David Kopel

[aileron]

You got to love this part.

218 Basically, McReynolds
adopted a traditional, commonsense interpretation of the Second
Amendment, assuming it guarantees an individual right to
possess and use firearms, subject to reasonable regulation of
time, place, and manner.219

[6172crew]

Its long and everyone who owns a firearm should read it. I didnt know Miller was a rat.

[dfletcher]

Its long and everyone who owns a firearm should read it. I didnt know Miller was a rat.

As is often the case in these matters - Miranda, Mapp & Gideon (v Wainwright if I remember correctly) - the persons bringing the case for review were often involved in questionable circumstance. Remember, SCOTUS is a court of appeals and to appeal - well, at least once someone in a position of responsibility pronounced you as the bad guy.

[6172crew]

As is often the case in these matters - Miranda, Mapp & Gideon (v Wainwright if I remember correctly) - the persons bringing the case for review were often involved in questionable circumstance. Remember, SCOTUS is a court of appeals and to appeal - well, at least once someone in a position of responsibility pronounced you as the bad guy.

Whats even worse is that Miller wasnt even heard during the scotus hearing...wtf!