United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

[jimmy the one]

33. You are dead wrong on just about everything

aiko: 1. If Miller had shown up for the court case and demonstrated that short-barrelled rifles were useful in trench warfare, they very well might have struck down the NFA for SBS. But no one showed up.

Strained & fractured reasoning. The opinions in miller 1939 that the unanimous supreme court ruling made, would've held - they would not have changed course from militia based to individual regardless of how the court 'might have' ruled on whether a disreputable american was able to cross a state line with a sawed off shotgun and argue he had a right to via 2ndA.

aik 2. An unorganized militia can be well-regulated if folks show up with the weapons they'll need to defend themselves from oppression. The unorganized militia can be defined in many different ways, but the founders intended that regular folks have the firearms they needed to staff a militia if needed. That's why they said the people shall have the right, not the militia.

Again more strained & fractured reasoning. The only time the unorganized militia has been activated was during wwII on the west coast in oregon, where about 5,000 americans, mostly wwI vets, showed up to patrol the west coast due to japanese invasion hysteria. They even choked then, as when a japanese IJN submarine surfaced neat Fort Stevens Oregon, the unorg'd commander failed to fire his cannon at it, thinking it was the invasion in progress, and he didn't want to reveal his firing position. Laughable, as is the unorganized militia concept, which is a JOKE.
Governors do not want to activate the unorganized militia out of fear that right wing gunnuts would show up & cause more problems than they would solve.
No, the unorganized militia is NOT the well regulated militia the founding fathers had in mind. Their well regulated militia showed up for drills yearly & had an ORGANIZATION, where they were accountable. It is LUDICROUS to contend the unorg'd militia qualify as a bona fide well regulated militia, that could show up spontaneously in a crisis & act as an efficient militia force.

aik: the founders intended that regular folks have the firearms they needed to staff a militia if needed

The firearms they had available were largely inaccurate single shot flintlock muskets or pistols with buckshot or ball which were susceptible to misfire in humid conditions & especially in rain. There were no semi automatic firearms nor hermetically sealed ammo nor efficient revolvers and rifling grooves & lands were still works in progress, not modern sophistication.
The musket circa 1791 was primarily prized not for its fire but for its bayonet which turned it effectively into an 'assault spear', not an assault shooting rifle. To frontally assault with only buck & ball in the 'chamber' without bayonet would have been a suicidal bonzai charge.

aik: The unorganized militia can be defined in many different ways,

And JOKE is one of them. It never meets, it has no mobilization point, no officers, no call ups even, no pay, no ratings, no leaders, no well defined objectives.
Outside of the pejorative I would like to see how you describe the unorg'd militia 'in many different ways'.

aik: .. That's why they said the people shall have the right, not the militia

You simply corrupt the wording & intent of the 2ndA, as scalia did in heller & mcd.