In an order on Monday, without explanation or comment, the Court rejected a civil rights lawsuit brought by the Calguns Foundation and the Second Amendment Foundation. [More]This business of "no historical authority suggests that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to sell a firearm" is subversive nonsense. As Edwin Vieira has noted:
All militiamen (except conscientious objectors) were to be provided with “small arms”: long guns and pistols. Those who were financially able purchased their arms in the free market, then possessed them as private property in their homes at all times. Those with insufficient means were supplied with firearms the Militia or some other governmental body usually procured in the market, in most instances retaining possession of those arms whilst enrolled. This reliance on a permanent private market for firearms guaranteed that most militiamen, through their own efforts, could always obtain firearms suitable for both collective and individual self-defense, and forestalled tyranny by precluding rogue public officials from monopolizing the production, distribution, and possession of firearms.I did not see that argued.
