[steve-b]

Trotting out that old lie about Miller again?

The "some reasonable relationship to the preservation of efficiency of a well regulated militia" qualifier referred to the parameters of which weapons were protected by the Second Amendment. The protection itself was clearly understood to pertain to individual possession and ownership.

The court was simply addressing what is now known as the "nukes and nerve gas" straw man.

[sailor4321]

You're absolutely right. As the 5th circuit said in Emerson, the Miller decision didn't really address the question of individual vs. collective right and to the extent that it even approached the issue it tended to support the individual rights position.

These guys read a sysnopsis of Miller or what some legal service says about it and they don't read the case.

[Dead Dog]

Doesn't Miller vs. US limit the individules right to own weapons of military significance, that is, Battle Rifles, Assault Rifles, Machine Guns ext...but not cut down shotguns.