One of the guys I subscribe to on Youtube put out this video yesterday.
he brought up United States v. Miller, A case i have never heard of.
United States v. Miller involved a criminal prosecution under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). Passed in response to public outcry over
the St. Valentine's Day Massacre, the NFA requires certain types of firearms (including but not limited to fully automatic firearms and
short-barreled rifles and shotguns) to be registered with the Miscellaneous Tax Unit (later to be folded into what eventually became the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or ATF) which at the time was part of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (ancestor of today's Internal
Revenue Service),[1] with a $200 tax paid at the time of registration and again if the firearm was ever sold.
Defendants Miller and Layton filed a demurrer challenging the relevant section of the National Firearms Act as an unconstitutional violation of the
Second Amendment. District Court Justice Heartsill Ragon accepted the claim and dismissed the indictment, stating, "The court is of the opinion that
this section is invalid in that it violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, U.S.C.A., providing, 'A well regulated
Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'" Justice Ragon
provided no further explanation of his reasons.[2]
....
Neither the defendants nor their legal counsel appeared at the Supreme Court. A lack of financial support and procedural irregularities prevented
counsel from traveling.[3] Miller was found shot to death in April, before the decision was rendered.[4]
United States v. Miller
Basically the US Supreme Court cited that Miller could not own the short barrel shotgun because it was not a weapon that was used by the Militia or
military of the time.
This decision could nullify the Feistein AWB bill before it can even get started because most of the weapons they seek to ban are non-NFA versions of
Military style firearms. Since the term Militia applies to men ages 18 - 45 it would seem that they alone could own those types of firearms. However
when you throw the
District of Columbia v. Heller Case in there, Now you have
the right to keep and bear arms as an individual right.
Looks like there is some light at the end of the tunnel.
But then again when have these politicians cared about the Constitution as of late?