Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
Page Number: 141.0

28 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

To  begin  with,  the  present  case  has  nothing  to  do  with 
actual military service.  The question presented presumes
that respondent is “not affiliated with any state-regulated
militia.”  552  U. S.  __  (2007)  (emphasis  added).    I  am 
aware  of  no  indication  that  the  District  either  now  or  in 
the  recent  past  has  called  up  its  citizenry  to  serve  in  a
militia, that it has any inkling of doing so anytime in the 
foreseeable  future,  or  that  this  law  must  be  construed  to 
prevent  the  use  of  handguns  during  legitimate  militia
activities.  Moreover, even if the District were to call up its
militia, respondent would not be among the citizens whose 
service would be requested.  The District does not consider 
him, at 66 years of age, to be a member of its militia.  See 
D. C.  Code  §49–401  (2001)  (militia  includes  only  male 
residents ages 18 to 45); App. to Pet. for Cert. 120a (indi-
cating respondent’s date of birth).   

Nonetheless,  as  some  amici  claim,  the  statute  might 
interfere  with  training  in  the  use  of  weapons,  training
useful  for  military  purposes.  The  19th-century  constitu-
tional  scholar,  Thomas  Cooley,  wrote  that  the  Second 
Amendment protects “learning to handle and use [arms] in
a  way  that  makes  those  who  keep  them  ready  for  their 
efficient use” during militia service.  General Principles of
Constitutional Law 271 (1880); ante, at 45 (opinion of the 
Court); see also ante, at 45–46 (citing other scholars agree-
ing  with  Cooley  on  that  point).    And  former  military  offi-
cers tell us that “private ownership of firearms makes for 
a more effective fighting force” because “[m]ilitary recruits
with previous firearms experience and training are gener-
ally  better  marksmen,  and  accordingly,  better  soldiers.”
Brief  for  Retired  Military  Officers  as  Amici  Curiae  1–2 
(hereinafter Military Officers’ Brief).  An amicus brief filed 
by  retired  Army  generals  adds  that  a  “well-regulated 
militia—whether  ad hoc  or  as  part  of  our  organized  mili-
tary—depends on recruits who have familiarity and train-
ing with firearms—rifles, pistols, and shotguns.”  Brief for