|
In the founding era the weapons in common use were the same for both
military and civilians. They even included cannon and warships. The
divergence between what is in common use for each occurred later, in
the 20th century. Neither Miller nor Heller say that it
is only what is in common us for civilians today, and they
would be
incorrect if they did. Both decisions are ambiguous in their wording,
and we have to go to the purpose of militia arms to get to the meaning
of what arms people have the right to keep and bear. Militia were
expected to be maintained in a state of readiness and equipment
sufficient to prevail over any regular military force, including our
own. There is more on this in Military Affairs. Reports to the U.S. Congress on military and militia matters. Volume 1 contains reports from Mar. 3, 1789, through Mar. 3, 1819. See particularly the reports on militia organization and militia returns showing organization and strength. Provides insight into original thinking on militia and the right to keep and bear arms. -- Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------- Constitution Society 2900 W Anderson Ln C-200-322, Austin, TX 78757 512/299-5001 www.constitution.org [email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------- |
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
