<?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: After Heller</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/07/16/after-heller/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/07/16/after-heller/</link>
	<description>The Sweet Release of Reason</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:57:06 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Larry</title>
		<link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/07/16/after-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-582375</link>
		<dc:creator>Larry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 12:20:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1548#comment-582375</guid>
		<description>The question is whether Heller neutralizes the political potency of the issue. I don&#039;t see a dramatic change, but if the regulators don&#039;t overstep, I see it fading.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question is whether Heller neutralizes the political potency of the issue. I don&#39;t see a dramatic change, but if the regulators don&#39;t overstep, I see it fading.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: crasch</title>
		<link>http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2008/07/16/after-heller/comment-page-1/#comment-582374</link>
		<dc:creator>crasch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=1548#comment-582374</guid>
		<description>Henigan&#039;s probably right to an extent.  But I think gun freedom activists are quite cognizant of de facto bans due to onerous or impossible to satisfy regulations.  A right that cannot be practically exercised is no right at all.    Now that the Supreme Court has recognized gun rights as an individual right, these de facto bans can be attacked more easily.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Henigan&#39;s probably right to an extent.  But I think gun freedom activists are quite cognizant of de facto bans due to onerous or impossible to satisfy regulations.  A right that cannot be practically exercised is no right at all.    Now that the Supreme Court has recognized gun rights as an individual right, these de facto bans can be attacked more easily.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
