The News Sun

Ban plan is wrongheaded on many levels

Editor:

The ill conceived plan by Senator Dianne Feinstein to ban semi-automatic rifles is clearly wrongheaded on many levels. I will only attempt to briefly address one, how such a ban violates the second amendment to the Bill of Rights.

The second amendment states: "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Let's review a couple of relevant Supreme Court cases that establish the intent of the Second Amendment. In the 1939 case United States v. Miller, The defendants Miller and Layton were charged with possession of a short barreled shotgun. The defense argued that this section of the National Firearms act violated their right to keep and bear arms. The court ruled against them saying in essence, a sawed off shotgun would not have a reasonable relationship to the efficiency of a militia, so it is not protected. In an obiter dictum, the court went on to explain the meaning of militia as "comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense". They further stated "when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

Let's review a couple of relevant Supreme Court cases that establish the intent of the Second Amendment. In the 1939 case United States v. Miller, The defendants Miller and Layton were charged with possession of a short barreled shotgun. The defense argued that this section of the National Firearms act violated their right to keep and bear arms. The court ruled against them saying in essence, a sawed off shotgun would not have a reasonable relationship to the efficiency of a militia, so it is not protected. In an obiter dictum, the court went on to explain the meaning of militia as "comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense". They further stated "when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

Thus only arms in common use that would be used in a militia comprised of people acting for the common defense were protected arms.

Today, such arms would be the very ones that Senator Feinstein wishes to ban. Arms such as the AR-15 would clearly be in common use as it is the best selling rifle in the U.S. By most estimates there are between 3 and 5 million AR-15s in the U.S. In addition to these, there are tens of millions of other semi-automatic firearms in private hands. It doesn't get much more "common use" than that. Unlike a sawed off shotgun, this type of gun would have a reasonable relationship to the efficiency of a militia.

You might ask "how does this apply to the individual gun owner"?

In the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller the court ruled: "The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home". The Court further stated: "United States v. Miller, does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes".

To sum it all up, The Supreme Court has ruled that second amendment protects the individual right to bear arms. The type of arms protected are those in common use that are useful for but not limited to militia use. Semi-automatic firearms are indeed in very common use. Attempts to ban such arms are beyond all doubt unconstitutional.

Senator Feinstein's attack on the Bill of Rights is an attack on the foundation of our country and treads dangerously close to sedition. It is also clearly a violation of the oath she swore as a U.S. Senator to uphold and defend the constitution. Her feckless gun ban schemes should be looked on with the same contempt that Senator Feinstein clearly has for the constitution.

Dana B. Orr

Friday, December 28, 2012 - www.newssun.com/ltr-122812-orr