The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 2 of 10)

is a terrific decision, worth reading in its entirety (well, perhaps not Henderson's incredibly tortured dissent). There may still be hope. br> -- Frank Natoli br> Newton, New Jersey /p>

In his piece on the recent Parker decision, Robert VerBruggen observes: "The ruling makes no issue of the fact Miller and Layton were not militia members. Rather, Miller and Layton failed to prove a militia might use a sawed-off shotgun."

My readings on the Miller decision indicate that, before the case could be heard, both men skipped bail, disappeared, and eventually were found dead. The case for militia utility of a short-barreled shotgun (called a "trench gun" by doughboys in WWI) wasn't proven because it wasn't argued. The solicitor general, in effect, got a free shot and won by default.

p>But the Miller case was actually a victory, of sorts, for Second Amendment advocates: the Court issued a writ of certiorari allowing Miller and Layton--as *individuals*--to plead their case, based upon the Second Amendment. Were it only a "collective" right, the writ would've been denied, because the two men would've lacked "standing". br> Even Laurence Tribe (albeit reluctantly) has conceded this point---when he switched from the "collective" side to the "individual" side. br> -- David Gonzalez br> Wheeling, Illinois /p>

topics:
Health Care, Economics, Religion, Abortion, Law, Military, NATO, Conservatism, Immigration, Energy, Unions