Collective rights

In the last few decades, courts and commentators have offered what may fairly be characterized as three different basic interpretations of the Second Amendment. The first is that the Second Amendment does not apply to individuals rather, it merely recognizes the right of a state to arm its militia. This states rights or collective rights interpretation of the Second Amendment has been embraced by several of our sister circuits. The government commended the states rights view of the Second Amendment to the district court, urging that the Second Amendment does not apply to individual citizens. 

The government s brief thereafter makes essentially two legal arguments. First, it contends that the right secured by the Second Amendment is only one which exists where the arms are borne in the militia or some other military organization provided for by law and intended for the protection of the state. Id. at 15. This, in essence, is the sophisticated collective rights model. 

Nor do we believe that any other portion of the Miller opinion supports the sophisticated collective rights model. 

We turn now to the Second Amendment s preamble A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. And, we ask ourselves whether this preamble suffices to mandate what would be an otherwise implausible collective rights or sophisticated collective rights interpretation of the amendment. We conclude that it does not. 

Alexander, J., R. Borgen, and K. McAnnany. 2004. The Role of the Powerful in the Global AIDS Pandemic The Collective Right to HtV/AIDS Treatment (unpublished) (on file with the author). 

Fig. 9 Total PBDE concentrations in herring gull eggs from the Great Lakes as a function of the year in which the samples were collected (left axis). Ratio of the sum of the concentrations of BDE-47, BDE-99, and BDE-100 divided by the sum of the concentrations of BDE-153 and BDE-154 (see Eq. 1) in herring gull eggs from the Great Lakes as a function of the year in which the samples were collected (right axis). Re-plotted from Norstrom et al. [41]...

Individual Freedom As with Res. 1541, self-determination in the Friendly Relations Declaration is a collective right. The Declaration is far less detailed than Res. 1541. Only once the principle refers to the freely expressed will of the peoples concerned. Individuals are not addressed. In analogy to Res. 1541, it is again a matter of making decisions for the whole of society. Thus, an individual opinion can be overridden. At the same time, freedom is stressed. 

One way of offering collective rights to minorities is to reserve a special proportion of seats in parliament, in the government or any other public sector for minority members. It is not the right of an individual to be appointed to a post at a... 

Valentine (2004), p. 447. The opposite argument exists also collective rights support peace and stability. See Zoltani and Koszorus (1996), pp. 137-140. 

---