<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Today&#8217;s the day</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/</link>
	<description>Up To The Minute Analysis Of Ohio Public Policy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2009 15:34:40 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: BuckeyeBlog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Dodging a bullet</title>
		<link>http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-568</link>
		<dc:creator>BuckeyeBlog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Dodging a bullet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:43:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/#comment-568</guid>
		<description>[...] justices of the United States Supreme Court are prepared to rule that there is such a thing as a collective right [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] justices of the United States Supreme Court are prepared to rule that there is such a thing as a collective right [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Owsiany</title>
		<link>http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/comment-page-1/#comment-567</link>
		<dc:creator>David Owsiany</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 14:09:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buckeyeinstitute.org/blog/2008/06/26/todays-the-day/#comment-567</guid>
		<description>Mike Maurer is absolutely right on the individual right vs. collective right issue as it relates to the Second Amendment.  In fact, Judge Silberman, who wrote the majority opinion striking down the DC gun control law for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals specifically addressed the issue by putting the Second Amendment in the context of the rest of the Bill of Rights. I expect (and hope) a majority of the US Supreme Court will agree in just a few moments. 

Here is a brief quote from Silberman&#039;s opinion:

&quot;When we look at the Bill of Rights as a whole, the setting of the Second Amendment reinforces its individual nature. The Bill of Rights was almost entirely a declaration of individual rights, and the Second Amendment’s inclusion therein strongly indicates that it, too, was intended to protect personal liberty.The collective right advocates ask us to imagine that the First Congress situated a sui generis states’ right among a catalogue of cherished individual liberties without comment. We believe the canon of construction known as noscitur a sociis applies here. Just as we would read an ambiguous statutory term in light of its context, we should read any supposed ambiguities in the Second Amendment in light of its context. Every other provision of the Bill of Rights, excepting the Tenth, which speaks explicitly about the allocation of governmental power, protects rights enjoyed by citizens in their individual capacity.The Second Amendment would be an inexplicable aberration fit were not read to protect individual rights as well.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mike Maurer is absolutely right on the individual right vs. collective right issue as it relates to the Second Amendment.  In fact, Judge Silberman, who wrote the majority opinion striking down the DC gun control law for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals specifically addressed the issue by putting the Second Amendment in the context of the rest of the Bill of Rights. I expect (and hope) a majority of the US Supreme Court will agree in just a few moments. </p>
<p>Here is a brief quote from Silberman&#8217;s opinion:</p>
<p>&#8220;When we look at the Bill of Rights as a whole, the setting of the Second Amendment reinforces its individual nature. The Bill of Rights was almost entirely a declaration of individual rights, and the Second Amendment’s inclusion therein strongly indicates that it, too, was intended to protect personal liberty.The collective right advocates ask us to imagine that the First Congress situated a sui generis states’ right among a catalogue of cherished individual liberties without comment. We believe the canon of construction known as noscitur a sociis applies here. Just as we would read an ambiguous statutory term in light of its context, we should read any supposed ambiguities in the Second Amendment in light of its context. Every other provision of the Bill of Rights, excepting the Tenth, which speaks explicitly about the allocation of governmental power, protects rights enjoyed by citizens in their individual capacity.The Second Amendment would be an inexplicable aberration fit were not read to protect individual rights as well.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
