Published today in Brewer v. State of GA by the GA Sup Ct http://www.gasupreme.us/pdf/s06a1104.pdf , the court artfully dodges deciding whether firearms seizure subsequent to a drug arrest violates the US 2A and the GA Const.'s assurances. Here is the relevant text: 2. We find no merit in appellant's argument that OCGA Â§ 16-13-49 (n) violates his right to bear arms under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. As this Court has long recognized, the construction given the Federal constitution by the United States Supreme Court is conclusive, Strickland v. State, 137 Ga. 1, 8-9 (72 SE 271) (1911), and under controlling opinions from that Court, the Second Amendment's "right to keep and bear arms" imposes a limitation on only Federal, not state, legislative efforts. Id. at 9. See Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (6 SC 580, 29 LE 615) (1886); United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 552 (23 LE 58 (1875). See also Bach v. Pataki, 408 F3d 75, 84 (2nd Cir. 2005). Appellant's argument under the State Constitution was not raised and ruled on below and thus we do not address it. See generally Wilson v. State, 212 Ga. 157 (1) (91 SE2d 16) (1956) (court will not pass upon constitutionality of statute not directly and properly made below and distinctly passed on by trial court). So they basically say, using a case from 1911, that the Sup Ct. has not used the 14th A to apply the 2A to the states, and that the GA Const. argument was not properly made below. While perhaps technically correct, this is one serious dodge. What a bunch of pansies! I hope there's a Sup Ct cert petition asking the question, does the 14th apply the 2nd to the states? This is not a particularly good test case, however, as it involves drugs.