Gun Ownership Is Your Right

The Washington Times (Washington, DC), May 9, 1999 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

Gun Ownership Is Your Right


On April 1, 1999, Federal District Judge Sam Cummings of the Northern District of Texas ruled that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is an individual right.

In the case, United States of America vs. Timothy Joe Emerson, Judge Cummings drew grounding from United States vs. Miller; a U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1934; a historical analysis of the Second Amendment and from scholarly writings.

Judge Cummings' ruling is quite bold, since he parted company with a host of federal courts, who while relying on Miller, have interpreted it to mean there is no individual right to own firearms or there is an individual right, but it ought to be ignored since the Supreme Court could not have foreseen what that would mean!

Miller was charged with the possession of an unregistered sawed-off shotgun, in violation of the 1934 National Firearms Act. The relevant part of the Supreme Court ruling in Miller is as follows: "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a shotgun having a barrel of less than 18 inches in length at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, we cannot say 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 its use could contribute to the common defense."

If in the minds of the Supreme Court justices, the Second Amendment was some sort of collective state right, they would simply have asked if Miller belongs to any state militia, and if he did not, the court would probably have said Miller being thus a private citizen could not make a Second Amendment claim. The court's focus was instead on the question of such a weapon having any military value even in the hands of a private citizens.

In Cases vs. United States (1942), the 1st Circuit held that the Second Amendment under Miller would have to be an individual right, but because that right would extend to private persons having all sort of military weapons, the court could not really have meant that. Here is the 1st Circuit talking: "Another objection to the rule of the Miller case as a full and general statement is that according to it Congress would be prevented by the Second Amendment from regulating the possession or use by private person not present or prospective members of any military unit, of distinctly military arms, such as machine guns, trench mortars, anti-tank, anti-aircraft guns, even though under the circumstances surrounding such possession or use it would be inconceivable that a private person could have any legitimate reason for having such a weapon.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

Gun Ownership Is Your Right
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?