<?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/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Supreme Muddled Thinking: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment Wrong</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/</link>
	<description>The Tenther Grapevine</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 23:22:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: William Plumpe</title>
		<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/#comment-3825</link>
		<dc:creator>William Plumpe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 03:47:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=5958#comment-3825</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First, it is extremely difficult to remove a Supreme Court justice, as it should be, because they must not be influenced by considerations such as re-election.  As a practical matter, we are stuck with Justice Breyer until he retires.  I downloaded and read the entire Heller decision, including Justice Breyer&#039;s dissent.  I also heard the broadcast in question.  Regardless of someone&#039;s opinion of his views, he is not stupid.  His dissent makes some very good points.  The reason for the 2nd amendment are clear enough.  Many people wanted a loose confederation of almost independent states, almost separate countries.  That would have been a disaster.  Imagine border skirmishes between New York and Pennsylvania, or my having to show a passport to cross the Mississippi at St. Louis.  Instead they created the largest free trade zone in existence at the time.  At the same time, they needed to reassure the people that the states would retain some autonomy.  Reassuring the people that they could be armed was a way to do that.  In my opinion, they would not have included the reference to a well regulated militia unless they meant the amendment to refer to a state militia.  Otherwise, they would have just said that the right to keep and bear arms would not be infringed.  I feel that the right to keep arms in one&#039;s home is important, and as I write this I could have a loaded shotgun in my hands in seconds, but I think the Constitution is silent on the issue.  While it doesn&#039;t guarantee the right to keep personal arms, it also does not prohibit them. 
 
Bill Plumpe   ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, it is extremely difficult to remove a Supreme Court justice, as it should be, because they must not be influenced by considerations such as re-election.  As a practical matter, we are stuck with Justice Breyer until he retires.  I downloaded and read the entire Heller decision, including Justice Breyer&#039;s dissent.  I also heard the broadcast in question.  Regardless of someone&#039;s opinion of his views, he is not stupid.  His dissent makes some very good points.  The reason for the 2nd amendment are clear enough.  Many people wanted a loose confederation of almost independent states, almost separate countries.  That would have been a disaster.  Imagine border skirmishes between New York and Pennsylvania, or my having to show a passport to cross the Mississippi at St. Louis.  Instead they created the largest free trade zone in existence at the time.  At the same time, they needed to reassure the people that the states would retain some autonomy.  Reassuring the people that they could be armed was a way to do that.  In my opinion, they would not have included the reference to a well regulated militia unless they meant the amendment to refer to a state militia.  Otherwise, they would have just said that the right to keep and bear arms would not be infringed.  I feel that the right to keep arms in one&#039;s home is important, and as I write this I could have a loaded shotgun in my hands in seconds, but I think the Constitution is silent on the issue.  While it doesn&#039;t guarantee the right to keep personal arms, it also does not prohibit them. </p>
<p>Bill Plumpe   </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The State&#8217;s Moral Relativism &#187; ReasonAndJest.com</title>
		<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/#comment-3824</link>
		<dc:creator>The State&#8217;s Moral Relativism &#187; ReasonAndJest.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 19:22:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=5958#comment-3824</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] Michael Maharrey: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment wrong [...] ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Michael Maharrey: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment wrong [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eds777</title>
		<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/#comment-3823</link>
		<dc:creator>eds777</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 12:29:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=5958#comment-3823</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We the People need to take action to remove from government those who are consistently muddle-jeaded, like Breyer.   ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We the People need to take action to remove from government those who are consistently muddle-jeaded, like Breyer.   </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/#comment-3822</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 2010 10:54:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=5958#comment-3822</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What a jerk! ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a jerk! </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tweets that mention Supreme Muddled Thinking: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment Wrong – Tenth Amendment Center Blog -- Topsy.com</title>
		<link>http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/12/supreme-muddled-thinking/#comment-3821</link>
		<dc:creator>Tweets that mention Supreme Muddled Thinking: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment Wrong – Tenth Amendment Center Blog -- Topsy.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 19:06:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=5958#comment-3821</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TenthAmendmentCenter and Lew Rockwell, A Distant Vision. A Distant Vision said: Supreme Muddled Thinking: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment Wrong http://ow.ly/1aqS3n [...] ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TenthAmendmentCenter and Lew Rockwell, A Distant Vision. A Distant Vision said: Supreme Muddled Thinking: Justice Breyer gets the 2nd Amendment Wrong <a href="http://ow.ly/1aqS3n" rel="nofollow">http://ow.ly/1aqS3n</a> [...] </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
