Posted on 07/02/2012 11:28:28 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
That was the narrow decision, but there was no testimony on the lower court level about the firearm in question having any "utility as an arm that could aid the militia in its duties" - and hence the desired result was returned. Nor was there any evidence (i.e. "judicial notice") presented on the Supreme Court level, because Miller was not represented (having been murdered while the case wound its way through the courts).
That was as made-up of a result as the Obamacare case - the 2nd Amendment references "arms" and not "militia-quality arms" or any other qualifier. In point of fact, there were military veterans on the Court, and they knew very well that short-barreled shotguns (A.K.A. "trench-brooms") were used extensively by the Army and Marines in WW1. The Court was as full of lying, disingenous, corrupt Constitution-shredders (but I repeat myself) as it is right now.
FYI, were the Miller case to be heard now, there'd be reams of evidence that FULL AUTG firearms (as well as short-barreled shotties) had excellent utility, such that the entire 1934 NFA would get tossed out on its arse...if we had an honest Court. Since we don't, it'll stay on the books as law. Whether people will choose to obey the dictates of a corrupt judiciary that is playing fig-leaf for a corrupt legislature and a corrupt executive is another matter altogether.
Not at all rhetorical. How many people would be fine with a tax on cigarettes of 10,000%?
It goes to the elitist mindset. They can afford insanely high prices for mundane products, and they enjoy them far more if the “hoi polloi” cannot afford them.
Buying a $400 pair of sunglasses for the label, though they are identical to a $15 pair at Walgreens, is somewhat frustrating to them. They would much prefer that the price of all sunglasses be raised to the point where only the wealthy can afford them.
If the price of cigarettes was indeed raised so high, you can bet that all the self-appointed elites would be chain smokers, to show their superiority.
The liberal elitist Bloomberg surrounds himself with a phalanx of heavily armed bodyguards, yet he still wants to prevent anyone else from having guns. Were he successful in getting rid of guns, his mansion would probably become an armory, so he could show off his superiority.
No, the Fed.gov will tax INACTION. If you DON’T turn in your guns within 10 days, you will pay a $10,000 per year tax per gun, which cannot be dismissed in bankruptcy. Fail to pay, and you are jailed, just like for nonpayment of child support, only more so.
Remember, it’s NOT a penalty, it’s a TAX. LOL.
To all previous posters.
Don’t forget what created this great country, unfair TAXES.
It is looking like we will need a re-run of the revolution pretty soon.
Just in case the Queen jumps into the presidential fray again, I hope there are no Freepers left who think she's anything but the female version of Obama, or that she "cares" any more about this country than he. She's the Psycho-Satan.
I guess they’re entitled to their opinions. thanx
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.