2nd Amendment Supreme Court references

[Oatka]

Somebody on the AR-15 board was looking for 2nd Amend. Supreme Court references. I thought I might as well post them here too.


"The Supreme Court has heard only five cases directly related to the Second Amendment. They are . . ." http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndsup.html

FEDERAL COURT CASES REGARDING THE SECOND AMENDMENT http://nraila.org/research/19990729-BillofRightsCivilRights-004.html

How the courts mis-cite US vs Miller http://i2i.org/SuptDocs/Crime/35.htm#_ftnref85

Super long paper by Koppel on the 2nd in 35 other gun cases http://i2i.org/SuptDocs/Crime/35.htm#_ftnref85

Here's a neat essay on how the 2nd came about:
The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms: The Common Law Tradition http://www.2ndlawlib.org/journals/maltrad.html#fnb27

And a classic:
The Embarrassing Second Amendment http://www.shadeslanding.com/firearms/embar.html

------------------
The New World Order has a Third Reich odor.

[This message has been edited by Oatka (edited June 02, 2000).]

 

[Stephen Ewing]

One question that's been bugging me about U.S. v. Miller: If I'm only allowed to have a sawed-off shotgun if the military has them, does it follow that I can have thermonuclear warheads if the military has them?

I read McReynolds' key paragraph to imply that I can't have, say, a katana, but mustard gas is fine. Likewise, a sporterized AR-15 is right out, but an M-16 is okay. Anybody else get that?

Steve

 

[Futo Inu]

The top three good cases for RKBA are

1. Dred Scott v. Sanford (18??) (mixed blessing; said blacks can't be citizens because if they were, they would obviously have the right to keep & bear arms, and clearly we CAN'T have THAT. Overturned of course as to holding, but the implication that the RKBA is individual is clear).

2. US v. Miller (1939) (if a weapon is useful to a military or paramilitary group, is protected by the 2nd, but since Mr. Miller didn't show up for oral arguments, we cannot remand for such a finding without his request, therefore, we can't say his short shotgun is protected; conviction upheld)

3. the 1992 case (fuzzy on this) of a fellow with a Spanish surname - something like Urdigo-Verdiguez - anyway, haven't actually read the case, so don't know its exact holding, but NRA says it's good.

Now, there are three other mixed blessing SC cases that are good as to holding that the rights are individual, but bad as to the 2nd amendment applying to the STATES' ability to regulate guns: IIRC, US v. Cruikshank, Presser vs. Illiniois, Miller v. Texas - all three of these basically said that "we the Supreme Court don't have to address the question of the nature and extent of the RKBA, because these cases deal with STATES' gun "control" regulations, and the second amemdment acts as a restraint ONLY on the federal gov't's ability to regulate guns, not the states', so the restrictions are upheld." HOWEVER, all three of these cases were decided in the late 1800s and very early 1900s, BEFORE the Supreme Court created the "incorporation" doctrine, which says that the rights enumerated in the BOR are "incorporated" or applied as prohibitions on state gov'ts through the due process clause of the 14th amendment, and so now the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments all apply to the states as well (not sure about ninth; the 3rd does not, and the Supreme shirks have been SILENT on this issue as to the incorporation of the second since the first two decades of this century, just as they have been silent on clearly setting forth the individual RKBA). gotta run right now...