[mvpel]

So if you notice someone blasting away with a trench gun, and then you later become a SC Justice, it’s not within judicial notice? LOL! Good points re “common” and “unusual” weapons above, btw.

Just to clarify, in case someone doesn't understand, the term "judicial notice" is a term of legal art. It means that the court accepts a given fact as true even though there's been no sworn testimony or evidence presented to prove it.

Typically it's applied to stuff like "July 4, 1984 fell on a Wednesday," and so on. Stuff that's widely known or can be determined using widely-known, universally-accepted methods.

[publiusF27]

Stuff that's widely known or can be determined using widely-known, universally-accepted methods.

But the use of trench brooms was widely known, and asking any soldier would have to qualify as a universally accepted method of determining whether he could name a military use for a short shotgun. I guess it depends upon what the meaning of "widely" is, which is somewhat less clear than the word "is" is. ;) But doesn't it seem that the Supremes at the time of the Miller decision could easily have said that it was well known that short shotguns had military utility?