Miller Case and 2nd Amendment

Re “Right to Arms,” letter, Dec. 20: The Supreme Court did not say in its 1939 U.S. vs. Miller decision that the term “the people” has the same meaning throughout the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 9th and 10th amendments to the Constitution. The Miller court did not discuss that question. Nor did it decide that the right to arms is an individual right.

What the Supreme Court said in U.S. vs. Miller was that the 2nd Amendment’s obvious purpose was “to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness” of the militia of the states. And then it added, “It must be interpreted and applied with that end in view.”

JACK WEAVER

San Diego

*

In his letter of Dec. 13, Martin Weisman stated that “in 1939 the 1/8U.S. Supreme Court 3/8 decided that the 2nd Amendment does not create a personal right to bear arms.” The court said no such thing. The case is U.S. vs. Miller (1939). In Mack vs. U.S. (1997), Justice Clarence Thomas, in referring to the Miller case, stated, “The court did not, however, attempt to define, or otherwise construe, the substantive right protected by the 2nd Amendment.” Additionally, in just this century, the court has specifically stated at least seven times that the first eight amendments in the Bill of Rights express and protect fundamental individual rights, not collective rights.

JOHN HAMAKER

Laguna Niguel