Randy Barnett has a great piece
on the ethics of Chicago-Kent College of Law's symposium on the Second Amendment, which was slanted entirely against pro-gun views.
I have real interest in this topic, being a Chicago-Kent grad '97, and also because that year I submitted a law review article on the Second Amendment to a national contest and won $3000!!!
Heh, I don't pay the NRA, they pay me.
The article was titled "Handgun Ownership As A Privacy Right", I don't have a copy, and it has disappeared off the face of the earth. Oops.
I gotta say it was a great article. Sure, I can say that now that no one can prove me wrong. I had it all sussed though. I bet 90-95% of all submissions to this contest were of the 'original intent of the Second Amendment means we can have guns' variety. So I took a different tack, and wrote a piece on the laws banning handguns outright in Hoffman Estates and other towns in Illinois.
My basic argument was, if the right to privacy protects the most important 'life decisions' a person makes, what could possibly be more important than the preeminent 'life decision' and natural right, self-defense? Condoms were not mentioned in the Bill of Rights, yet nonetheless Griswold v. Connecticut
found them to be a type of protected object. All the more so for guns then, a type of object that is specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
Anyway, the Chicago-Kent Law Review, in its symposium format really is awesome. The Ninth Amendment symposium was great, and really put the publication on the map.
Update: Pejman chimes in
9:40 PM |