I just started reading Unintended Consequences and I have a few questions : How much truth is there in the part about US vs Miller ? Is Gutensohn a real person ? Did he really just say fuck it and not goto SCOTUS ? Why was the NRA not involved in this ? If it really went down the way it is in the book it really pisses me off that we have to deal with all these unconstitutional laws because one guy was too cheap to make a trip, especially when he knew he had a sure winner. Also the Warsaw uprising is that stuff true ? Are any of the people based on real people ?

I can't wait to finish this book. I'm gonna harass everyone I know into reading it once I'm done with it.

I just finished reading it too.  I bought it after all the stuff I've heard about it on this site.  I too am going to tell everyone I know about it.  I already have three people who want to borrow my copy after I'm done, just from reading them excerpts.....

I think everyone that's interested in the gun culture in the United States should read this book.

Most of the stuff I read was factual.  The few things I can't speak for, are the things I've never heard of, and that  prompted me to research them better.  I ended up learning more than I thought from this book.

I also just started reading it. It would be very interesting to research and find out exactly how much truth there is to most of the book.

I'm not very far yet, but so far it is VERY interesting.

I also try to tell everyone about it that I think would read it.

Due respect should be shown to the pro bono lawyer who was defending Miller in the lower Courts. He won the case. The charges were dismissed!

When it came time and the government appealed the case to the US Suprme Court, Miller was not around and the lawyer didn't have the funds that would have been needed to present Miller's case before the high court.

Briefs in Supreme Court cases must be printed, that is, not typed, but commercially printed at a sometimes great cost, and that fact alone causes a lot of folks not to pursue appeals to the Supreme Court in indigent cases.

Noting the failure of the Defendant to address the issues raised by the government on appeal, the Supreme Court wrote:

[b] “In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less that eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that is use could contribute to the common defense.”[/b]

Such a view clearly shows that none of the Justices had WWI trench combat experience, where a sawed off shotgun might prove very useful indeed!

Eric The(Idiots!)Hun[>]:)]

Yes respect is due to Gutensohn for his pro bono work. But after how happy he was that he won the case in federal court you'd think he'd of wanted to goto SCOTUS if nothing else but an ego trip knowing that he would most likely win. He did after all say that the federal court victory was better then money or sex, so why does he all of a sudden worry about money when he knows he has a sure winner ?

BTT

The book pretty much sums it up.



Happened pretty much the way as described there. Less pathos, more desperation, but in essence, yup, that's how it was.



Not based on anything in particular, but on the participants in general.

IIRC, the Warsaw people had like five or so guns at the start of the uprising. And they held off one of the top armies of the day for quite a while.....

Scott

I looked up the Ken Bellaws raid and that was pretty much how it went down in real life. Amazing.

This book is awesome. I can not put it down. I'm up to 1994 now.

My son and I have each read it twice.  John Ross did a great thing there.

It should be required reading for all prospective ATF agents... especially the part about the hogs. [:D]

I just bought it last weekend and haven't started to read it yet but it was my understanding that it was all fictional and any situation that happened in real life is just coincidence.  It sounds like, after reading this thread, that some things written are based on fact. So is this true?  If so, I might have to invest in some hogs![;)]

I just finished reading it for the 3rd time.  (Stayed up 'till 2AM Friday morning.  Again.)

As far as I have been able to determine, every incident involving the BATF that is described in detail is factually accurate, though the names may be changed (and probably are.)  The FBI Miami shootout story is also supposed to be factually accurate, including the two Fibbies with the MP5's double-teaming a waitress so they weren't in on the shootout.  The mentions of the BATF entrapping people at gun shows are factually accurate.  The story about the BATF supervisor instructing agents to perjure themselves about the 100% reliability of the NFA database is documented fact.  The Randy Weaver story is factually accurate, as evidenced by his trial and acquittal.  The Branch Davidian story, while I think he may have embellished, is generally correct.  

Every government excess, every stupid law, every infringment on our rights, and every infuriating action by the BATF as detailed in [i][u]Unintended Consequences[/i][/u] is factually accurate.  The first two-thirds of the book should be required reading for everyone of voting age in this country.  Because they would be wondering how we got to this point, and why we hadn't started feeding the hogs already.

Every time I read it, I feel like we're getting closer.

I put it down for the recommended books list at the county library. They got it.....


Scott