Landmark Court Decision
From: Dick Wells <email@example.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 13:29:39 -0600
Subject: landmark court decision
To The Editor, Sanders County Ledger;
The following excerpts from a landmark ruling from the 5th Circuit Court of
Appeals might interest your readers. The question of the meaning of the Second
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is answered here. There can be no misconstruction
of the Second Amendment in the light of what the court has said:
have no Rights, only power and authority; the use of the word People has a meaning
that is constant throughout the Constitution and Amendments; the Right to keep
and bear arms is an individual, personal Right and is in no way a collective
The issue before the court (as I understand it) was that Dr. Emerson was held
to be in violation of a federal statute barring anyone under a restraining order
from possessing firearms. His assertion was that such a restraint was a violation
of due process, as he was never found guilty of a crime and all other charges
against him had since been dismissed. The appellate court up-held his conviction,
which will likely now be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The reference to Miller is a 1939 case wherein the court ruled that the individual,
Miller, in possession of a sawed-off shotgun could not be justified as having
a Militia type weapon. The anti-self-defense proponents (Clinton's justice dept.,
et al) have offered this decision by the court as evidence that the Right to
keep and bear arms is a collective, or state's right.
The excerpts are from http://KeepAndBearArms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=2686,
a leader in the petition drive to restore the Second Amendment in all of the
50 united States of America.
(Excerpts not included here,
but can be found here.
To Get Your Letters Printed Here
Click here and read submission guidelines.