Posted: 7/20/2026 5:55:51 PM EDT
"There's some significant news in here. The foremost expert on US v. Miller, the Supreme Court's first modern Second Amendment case, says the official story is likely false. He has a paper coming, but he shares claims that cops set up Miller's NFA arrest and probably killed him."
|
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
|
I'm not going to write it off as a big gov't plot, but it was certainly a garbage decision. I was first exposed to the details when I read Unintended Consequences. It was so farfetched, I put the book down and started researching. I didn't believe the author. After the repeal of Prohibition, the gov't had a surplus of revenue agents at the Treasury. They were aware of Miller and Layton, thought they were bootlegging/making moonshine, and were trying to find their still. Coming up empty, they initiated a traffic stop for the short-barreled shotgun. Miller was a bootlegger. Like drugdealers of today, not an occupation producing longevity. Probably more likely he was killed by a rival or other criminal/bootlegger. If he was killed by LE, it was likely not an assassination because of the case, just simply a small-time criminal playing FAFO with cops. When the case reached the SC, nobody showed up for the defense, so the gov't attorneys were unopposed. They claimed short-barreled shotguns were not widely used in the military. With no one present for the defense, the claim went unchallenged, and the SC accepted the claim. |
Posterity! You will never know, how much it cost the present Generation, to preserve your Freedom! I hope you will make a good Use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in Heaven, that I ever took half the Pains to preserve it.---John Adams
|
Originally Posted By intheburbs: When the case reached the SC, nobody showed up for the defense, so the gov't attorneys were unopposed. They claimed short-barreled shotguns were not widely used in the military. With no one present for the defense, the claim went unchallenged, and the SC accepted the claim. Everything since then is backwards. Anything widely used by the military IS able to be banned, or at least severely restricted. Then in the Heller case they twist themselves into a knot trying to reconcile the language of the Miller decision with modern sensibilities. |
This is...a clue - Pat_Rogers
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders
I'm not adequately aluminumized for this thread. - gonzo_beyondo
CO, MI, OR - Please lobby your legislators to end discrimination against non-resident CCW permit holders