Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

The ACLU on guns

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by .cheese., Apr 21, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. .cheese.

    .cheese. Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    3,808
    I noticed it was listed on the NRA-ILA site that the ACLU has supported anti-gun groups either financially or otherwise.

    As a member of the ACLU, and a former intern who the head of the local branch very much likes and wants to come back to work when I get a chance - I would like it if you guys can give me a breakdown of what exactly it is they are doing that is anti-gun so I know what to address.

    I will certainly be contacting them about it. I didn't work for, and join, a group that is supposed to be working against our rights. I joined and worked for the ACLU to protect our rights, and while I know they don't protect the second - working against it is a whole separate issue that I need to know about.
     
  2. thexrayboy

    thexrayboy Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2006
    Messages:
    1,324
    Location:
    northern nevada
    Every thing I have read and heard over many years regarding the ACLU and the 2A has been negative in regards to their support for it. I do not know if
    they have an officially posted position regarding it but their actions as near as can be determined do not support the Second. Being founded by persons of communist/socialist mentality would tend to make me believe they have no
    use for self reliance, being able to take care of oneself flys in the face of socialist doctrine that the state should be all powerful telling the subjects what to do and how to live. The differences between socialism and communism are minimal at best.
     
  3. tmajors

    tmajors Member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    659
    Location:
    Boise, ID
    From the ACLU themselves on their website:

    ACLU on Gun Control
     
  4. Soybomb

    Soybomb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    3,959
    http://www.homelandstupidity.us/2007/04/07/aclu-in-texas-helps-protect-traveling-gun-owners/
     
  5. torpid

    torpid Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    1,945
    Location:
    CA coast
    From what I can gather, the Texas ACLU is a different breed than the other chapters in that it actually cares about defending ALL of our rights.
     
  6. DrDeFab

    DrDeFab Member

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2005
    Messages:
    124
    ...and they call that a "neutral" position. :scrutiny:

    Also, the ACLU of Southern California posted (as recently as 2003):
    That's enough for me.

    If you'll pardon the pithy folk aphorism; "Therefore, if they ain't for us they must be agin us..." - [And bonus points if you know who got that one into newsprint ;) ]
     
  7. 3rdpig

    3rdpig Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    603
    Notice how the ACLU has adopted the generic "assault weapon" moniker. And we've all seen how "assault weapon" can be morphed to cover anything from an AK-47 to a 10/22 to a pump action shotgun with the dreaded barrel shroud.

    They push for "common sense" gun control, then change the meaning of the word, thus expanding the boundaries of their ban far beyond what the original legislation proposed.

    As Carolyn McCarthy proved, most of the banners don't even know what they're banning.

    The ACLU is the enemy, pure and simple.
     
  8. Soybomb

    Soybomb Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2005
    Messages:
    3,959
    Can you give me a few examples of the aclu working against us to sell me on this?
     
  9. Robert Hairless

    Robert Hairless Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2003
    Messages:
    3,983
    If all pro-gun people refused employment with organizations such as the ACLU there will be no pro-gun people working within those groups.

    You can be much more effective and useful within the organization, where you might be able to influence it to at least some extent, than outside as a member of the resentfuls.

    In those situations more can be done by example than by diatribe. What I mean is that if you are a sensible, responsible, levelheaded, likeable, and "normal" person who does his work well--and who does not try to convert or confront anyone--you demonstrate that not all gun owners are fanatics or lunatics.

    We can use that kind of representation. Take the job. Don't get bogged down in the muck. Do some good.
     
  10. Thain

    Thain Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    704
    Location:
    Lansing, Michigan
    I'm a member of the ACLU and the NRA. I care deeply about the 1st and the 2nd, and each group is very good at defending their speciality.
     
  11. NM234

    NM234 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    113
    From the ACLU:

    "The national ACLU is neutral on the issue of gun control. We believe that the Constitution contains no barriers to reasonable regulations of gun ownership. If we can license and register cars, we can license and register guns.

    Most opponents of gun control concede that the Second Amendment certainly does not guarantee an individual's right to own bazookas, missiles or nuclear warheads. Yet these, like rifles, pistols and even submachine guns, are arms.

    The question therefore is not whether to restrict arms ownership, but how much to restrict it. If that is a question left open by the Constitution, then it is a question for Congress to decide."

    So everything else I have read said they have really fought neither way on the issue, the reason they may have funded other groups that have is due to that group supporting 1st A rights or the like.

    Their reasoning:

    "The ACLU has often been criticized for "ignoring the Second Amendment" and refusing to fight for the individual's right to own a gun or other weapons. This issue, however, has not been ignored by the ACLU. The national board has in fact debated and discussed the civil liberties aspects of the Second Amendment many times.

    We believe that the constitutional right to bear arms is primarily a collective one, intended mainly to protect the right of the states to maintain militias to assure their own freedom and security against the central government. In today's world, that idea is somewhat anachronistic and in any case would require weapons much more powerful than handguns or hunting rifles. The ACLU therefore believes that the Second Amendment does not confer an unlimited right upon individuals to own guns or other weapons nor does it prohibit reasonable regulation of gun ownership, such as licensing and registration."

    I agree with the above, join both the ACLU and the NRA, the ACLU for 1a rights, the NRA for 2a rights.
     
  12. lanternlad1

    lanternlad1 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    770
    As a card carrying member of BOTH the ACLU AND the NRA, I look at it this way...

    The ACLU works hard to protect MOST of our rights.
    The NRA works hard to protect the right the ACLU doesnt protect.

    That way, I'm covered. :)

    The problem with the Constitution is, either it works for EVERYONE, or it doesn't work at all. :) These two groups disagree on different points, but the big picture is the same for both - "Defend Freedom or Lose It".
     
  13. antsi

    antsi Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,398
    NM234 - do you actually believe that the 2nd ammendment was meant to protect states' rights to maintain militias?

    This is such a transparent fabrication, a tortured reading, and intellectually dishonest. I don't think any person with any kind of honesty can read the 2nd and believe that it does not apply to "the people."

    The fact that the ACLU has, as its official policy, decided to write an item off of the bill of rights on the basis of such a flimsy excuse, discredits the entire organization.

    What other civil right will they similarly "explain away" as soon as it becomes inconvenient for the advancement of their social agenda?

    For all the other civil rights, they promote as wide a reading as possible. Flag burning? It's a form of "speech." Abortion? It's protected by a right to privacy that is obvious if you read between the lines. But the second ammendment, which is there in obvious plain language, somehow "doesn't count."

    Sorry; this is not a principled organization pursuing civil rights idealistically. This is a left wing political advocacy organization wrapping itself in the cloak of civil rights.
     
  14. obm

    obm Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2005
    Messages:
    182
    Location:
    USA
    the problem with the aclu is their hypocrisy. they will fight with unabated zeal and uncompromising passion to protect all the amendments in the bill of rights...cept for the 2nd amendment.

    they take all the amendments and say, "this is the law, no ifs ands or buts"....cept for the 2nd amendment. they rationalize why the 2nd amendment doesn't apply to citizens.

    the aclu are hypocrites. having said that, they do protect most of our civil liberties. until another organization comes along that respects the constitution in it's entirety the alcu is the only 800lbs gorilla when it comes to keeping the government in check with regard to our civil liberties.
     
  15. Agent 006 &7/8

    Agent 006 &7/8 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Messages:
    43
    Location:
    The Mountains of Northern Wyoming
    The preamble of the US Constitution begins... WE THE PEOPLE
    The First Amendment... or the Right of THE PEOPLE..
    The Second Amendment... the Right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms...
    The Fourth Amendment... The Right of THE PEOPLE to be secure...
    The Ninth Amendment... retained by THE PEOPLE.
    The Tenth Amendment... or to THE PEOPLE.

    And several places throughout the body of the Constitution references "the People" When the Founders wrote the Constitution they were very clear as to when they were refering to the Central Government, the States (often refered to as "the Many States") and the people.
     
  16. NM234

    NM234 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    113
    As I stated before, I am against gun control. I just posted that to help clarify the ACLU's stance. And I do agree with them on most things; although I would never do it, I don't think flag burning should be illegal so long as you own the flag and its done in a manner that does not risk catching anything on fire (I sorta see it as both a property thing and a speech thing, you buy the flag and you are allowed to speak against the government); I am somewhat pro-choice (only for the first couple months, before the fetus develops any ability to think (before even risking hitting that point) ; I don't feel its more alive than a sperm or egg at that point; also I can see it being a privacy issue given doctor/patient rights). Also the ACLU has defended conservatives before, they offered to help defend Rush Limbaugh's medical records. Also a Jewish lawyer from the ACLU defended a Neo-Nazi's right to free speach. They stood against Hillary Clinton when she helped co-sponsor an attempt to make flag burning illegal.

    That said I do think they have attracted more of a following from liberals than conservatives, but I know conservatives who are members as well. I do feel that their stance against 2a rights is the one thing I truly disagree with them on.
     
  17. NM234

    NM234 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    113
    "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free
    State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
    The Second Amendment to the Constitution

    Although I am against gun control, that is the wording. So I can see why there would be some confusion. It does say militia, now for example, the michigan militia owns weapons we as individuals can't, because they are a militia.

    I personally think people should be allowed to own basically anything other than WMDs. I think that, for example, a mounted machine gun, should be allowed to be owned by an individual. We allow corporations to own such items (actually one way around some gun laws, if you are a doctor, lawyer, businessman, who owns some sort of business/practice, if you declare yourself a corporation you can own much more weaponry than a individual can (I have heard this from multiple places, but correct me if I'm wrong). I think this is wrong, if a corporation can own it, we (individuals) should be able to as well)
     
  18. obxned

    obxned Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,490
    Location:
    OBX, NC
    ACLU = quislings!
     
  19. Joe Demko

    Joe Demko Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    6,523
    Location:
    Just two minutes from sanity.
    Let's see...the ACLU pretty much refuses to get involved in 2A cases. This rather renders their postition on it moot. As a life member of the NRA for a very long time, I can tell you the NRA doesn't get involved outside of 2A issues. This renders their position on such issues moot as well.
    The ACLU has fought many fights from which we all, as Americans, have benefitted.

    Don't let this get in the way of you enjoying your daily period of recreational outrage, though.
     
  20. Aguila Blanca

    Aguila Blanca Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,693
    :confused:

    I certainly don't concede that, and I don't know a single shooter or gun owner who does. So what gun owners comprise this undocumented "most" of which they speak?

    The 2nd Amendment says I have a right to keep and bear "arms." It does not say what kind of arms, nor does it mention or authorize any sort of "reasonable regulation." Back in the period when the Constitution was written the U.S. didn't have (and didn't want) a standing army. So where did militia's get their heavy armaments (cannons)? Simple -- the local squire (who was probably also appointed the commanding officer) owned them. Since cannons were the heaviest "arms" they had back then and private citizens were allowed to own them, IMHO that directly equates to me being allowed to own a tank or a fighter aircraft.
     
  21. Titan6

    Titan6 member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    4,745
    Location:
    Gillikin Country
  22. AntiqueCollector

    AntiqueCollector Member

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2007
    Messages:
    842
    The ACLU was founded by communists to push their agenda under a disguise of being "patriots" defending the constitution. No suprise they don't support the second ammendment.
     
  23. Texshooter

    Texshooter Member

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2004
    Messages:
    481
    The ACLU is selective in which of the Bill of Rights they believe in.

    They are phoneys.

    And, as stated, they were started by Communists to undermine the Republic.
     
  24. Chui

    Chui member

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    346
    Wanna bet you didn't?
     
  25. ArmsAkimber

    ArmsAkimber Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2002
    Messages:
    74
    Location:
    Dayton, Ohio
    Last time I checked, the ACLU has a .pdf file of the Bill Of Rights posted on their website. The managed to come up with a way to simultaniously copy the language of the 2nd amendment verbatim, while marginalizing it (literally). This .pdf present the amendments in a left-right-left-etc justification pattern. Consequently, the second amendment is tucked away to the right side of the page.

    Before anyone accusing me of being a member of the tin foil hat brigade, ask yourself, why would they bother with this idiosyncratic formatting.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page