Oyez, oyez, oyez!
United States v. Miller (1939)
Second Amendment
"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."
Gun Control Law found constitutional
according to U.S. Supreme Court
Mr. Justice McReynolds of the U.S. Supreme Court wrote the lead opinion for United States v. Miller (No. 696, Argued March 30, 1939, Decided May 15, 1939; 307 U.S. 174).
The Court declared the case involving the National Firearms Act as "Not violative of the Second Amendment of the Federal Constitution." (from syllabus; color emphasis added)
Case Summary (from syllabus)
"The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizens the right to keep and bear such weapons." (Color emphasis added)
Militia Concept - Excerpts from the lead opinion written by US Supreme Court Justice McReynolds
"The Constitution, as originally adopted, granted to the Congress power --
'To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.'
"With obvious purpose to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of such forces, the declaration and guarantee of the Second Amendment were made. It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view." (Color emphasis added)
"The Militia which the States were expected to maintain and train is set in contrast with Troops which they [307 U.S. 179] were forbidden to keep without consent of Congress. The sentiment of the time strongly disfavored standing armies; the common view was that adequate defense of country and law could be secured through the Militia -- civilians primarily, soldiers on occasion.
"The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily, 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.
"'The American Colonies In The 17th Century,' Osgood, Vol. 1, ch. XIII, affirms in reference to the early system of defense in New England --
'In all the colonies, as in England, the militia system was based on the principle of the assize of arms. This implied the general obligation of all adult male inhabitants to possess arms, and, with certain exceptions, to [307 U.S. 180] cooperate in the work of defence.
'The possession of arms also implied the possession of ammunition, and the authorities paid quite as much attention to the latter as to the former.
'A year later [1632] it was ordered that any single man who had not furnished himself with arms might be put out to service, and this became a permanent part of the legislation of the colony [Massachusetts].'
"Also,
'Clauses intended to insure the possession of arms and ammunition by all who were subject to military service appear in all the important enactments concerning military affairs. Fines were the penalty for delinqency, whether of towns or individuals....'
"The General Court of Massachusetts, January Session 1784, provided for the organization and government of the Militia."
"By an Act passed April 4, 1786, the New York Legislature directed:
'...That every Citizen so enrolled and notified shall, within three Months thereafter, provide himself, at his own Expense, with a good Musket or Firelock, a sufficient Bayonet and Belt, a Pouch with a Box therein to contain not less than Twenty-four Cartridges suited to the Bore of his Musket or Firelock, each Cartridge containing a proper Quantity of Powder and Ball, two spare Flints, a Blanket and Knapsack....'
"The General Assembly of Virginia, October, 1785, (12 Hening's Statutes) declared,
'The defense and safety of the commonwealth depend upon having its citizens properly armed and taught the knowledge of military duty.'
"It further provided for organization and control of the Militia, and directed that 'All free male persons between the ages of eighteen and fifty years,' with certain exceptions, 'shall be inrolled or formed into companies.' 'There shall be a private muster of every company once in two months.' "
"Most if not all of the States have adopted provisions touching the right to keep and bear arms. Differences in the language employed in these have naturally led to somewhat variant conclusions concerning the scope of the right guaranteed. But none of them seems to afford any material support for the challenged ruling of the court below." (Bolded color emphasis added.)
Read the entire opinion and footnotes.