Perhaps the duties of the militia are different today than they were.

However, I disagree with the government on the utility of the militia.

I think we need more ‘militia attitude’. We need to step up and fix those things that go wrong. I see some of that happening. Flight 93, for one. But also some neighbors in NO during Katrina. I have friends who were out of town during that and some of their neighbors armed up and kept the houses and property safe. This also includes ‘mundane’ activities like sand-bagging when the waters are rising.

Under current Federal law, I am a member of the militia.
Under current Illinois State law, I am a member of the militia.

Several states still have active defense forces. These forces were used at least as recently as the 1940’s.

Remember: no militia, no free state.

Remember: no militia, no free state.

Nope, I think the original works best.

Not the only function however…

I didn’t make the rule, the Supreme Court did. I’m suggesting a way to work within what The Court gave us to work with. It’s much easier to do something like that, than to get a precedent overturned. Common use was dicta, but the lower courts will give weight to it. Maybe we can find someone on a lower court who’s willing to take a different look at “common use” that might not be entirely open to going against The Court’s dicta on the matter.

The federal judiciary is not amiable toward gun rights. If they were, we would have settled this a lot sooner. Hell, even Judge Posner, who is generally pretty sensible, is on the wrong side of this issue.

That said, Fincher isn’t the case you’re going to win with. Judges will look for reasons to dispose of the case, rather than seriously engage the issue. If I think about how it might make sense to go after the NFA, I would start with suppressors, SBRs, SBSs. You’d rather it be an administrative denial rather than a criminal case. Get someone to try to register a suppressor in a jurisdiction where the local sheriff won’t sign off.. use the denial as standing, etc. Then take another little bit off if you can.

But really, I think the judiciary will need time to digest Heller. You’ll want incorporation to be a given, and a pretty wide variety of arms that actually are common to be protected before we worry about the NFA. For now, these kinds of cursory dismissals are what we’re going to see, and I’m not sure there’s too much point in getting worked up about them until we get the basics more established.

I am curious why you are going with common use as “part of the ordinary equipment of police work”. It seems to me that undercuts the military preparedness purpose of the second amendment because ordinary police equipment is definitely not military. Plus there was no concept of a professional police force when the IIA was written. I understand it would solve the problem of “common use” for new firearms that are introduced but I’m concerned it would end up being even more limiting for existing firearms.

Dod