Ron Paul supporter appeals to US Supreme Court regarding right to keep and bear arms!

[Matt Collins]

RICHARD HAMBLEN Petitioner vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Respondent

QUESTION PRESENTED:
Whether the Second Amendment Guarantees Members Of A Legitimate State Authorized Militia To Keep and Bear Arms Supplied By Themselves Of The Kind In Common Use By The Military At The Time?



Read more here:
http://www.esnips.com/doc/900c2a82-...-Writ-of-Certiorari,-Hamblen-Vs-United-States



.

 

[Reason]

 

[dr. hfn]

you need arms that are able to repel tyrants and tyranny

 

[Imperial]

He won't win.

 

[Chester Copperpot]

He shouldn't go to the SCOTUS.. the constitution is written in English.. We can all read clearly what it says...

 

[Matt Collins]

He shouldn't go to the SCOTUS.. the constitution is written in English.. We can all read clearly what it says...

YouTube - Rich Hamblen on the Second Amendment

 

[Pericles]

This is a "make or break" case.

 

[Richard A Hamblen]

To: Imperial (post #4)

Is it a rule of justice that one accepts unconstitutional behavior because there is precedent for it?

 

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - Richard A. Hamblen Challenges the Feds to Uphold Constitutional Rights

 

[tangent4ronpaul]

The question is really about if he can build a machine gun.

TN Gun laws here:

http://harrislawoffice.com/content/areas_of_practice/tennessee_firearms/machine_guns.htm

They are class III friendly, so he could of legally bought whatever he wanted. His crime was building one that was not an original design, but rather re-activating a de-milled weapon.

-t

 

[Richard A Hamblen]

No, the question is as it is being presented to the Supreme Court. Miller and Heller are not reconcilable. Read the petition. When you divorce the Second Amendment from the Militia, you are doomed to losing what remains of your gun rights. Scalia wants to cite Miller as precedent for Heller, but he selectively quotes from Miller, misrepresents the material facts, and ignores the conclusion. The operative phrase is not merely "in common use at the time", but also "part of the ordinary military equipment...which could reasonably contribute to the common defense". Quite a different meaning when the full quote is furnished. Read the words.

 

[Imperial]

To: Imperial (post #4)

Is it a rule of justice that one accepts unconstitutional behavior because there is precedent for it?

No, I'm not saying it is acceptable. I am just saying it will be difficult to gain victory in this case. I hope I am pleasantly surprised.

 

[Matt Collins]

YouTube - Richard A. Hamblen Challenges the Feds to Uphold Constitutional Rights

 

[Matt Collins]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/55862.html

 

[Matt Collins]

http://www.humblelibertarian.com/2010/04/hamblen-vs-united-states-case-brief.html

 

[Matt Collins]

Here is Rich Hamblen being interviewed on Free Talk Radio last week:
[url]http://www.zshare.net/audio/758008255a995ee5/#[/URL]