Will ACLU Support Gun Rights After McDonald?

Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bushmaster1313

Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
3,653
Location
Peoples Republik of New Jersey
Assuming McDonald finds that the 2nd Amendment applies to the States, Duh, will the ACLU change its stand and support people challenging the infringement of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

Before Heller the ACLU took the hypocritical position (there have been many) that it did not need to support the 2nd Amendment because it did not establish an individual right. Even though this was clearly wrong to any lover of liberty or student of the Constitution, it did pass the red face test and it gave the ACLU a legalistic leg to stand on.

Now the law is that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. After McDonald the law should be that it applies to the States. If so, will the ACLU support individuals asserting infringement of their 2nd Amendment rights?

Has the ACLU already started to do so?

Note, I do not believe that the ACLU filed any brief in McDonald. Even the Brady bunch did not file a brief against incorporation.
 
No. The ACLU is about advancement of left wing ideals, and not about protecting civil liberities.
 
I posted on their website several times about the 2nd amendment after they sent me an invite for a free trial membership to their website. They eventually sent me an uninvite and referred me to the NRA.
 
No. They don't believe it's an individual right... They have made statements in the past that have made it clear that they will never believe the 2a should be anything but abolished.
 
Some of the state ACLU organizations will; the national level, never. (that's why we have the NRA, SAF, etc.)

I'm glad someone is looking out for our 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th amendment rights.
 
I know that the ACLU says they refuse to seek an expansion of any right to keep and bear arms because they think an expansion would be bad for public safety.

Anyone know how the ACLU rationalizes their refusal to support the now extablished individual right to keep and bear arms?
 
No, they will not support the 2nd Amendment in any form IMHO.

They have always favored the collective theory and believe in the total prohibition of private firearms ownership IMHO.

Currently, I have heard they rationalize it by concluding Heller only applies to the Federal government.
 
The better question is whether gun owners will support the ACLU's agenda?

We need to come to them before we can expect them to come to us. So many gun owners approve of such things as:

1. State-sponsored religion;
2. Discrimination against homosexuals;
3. Keeping Guantanamo Bay open and not extending civil rights to the prisoners held there;
4. Invasions of privacy under the "War on Terror;"
5. Keeping drugs illegal;
6. Joe Arpaio's prisoner abuse;
7. Allowing the military to recruit young people aggressively;
8. Allowing police to use Tasers;
9. Banning flag burning;
10. Capital punishment;
11. etc.,

Civil rights are not severable, and the ACLU more frequently sees us across the table than on the same side of it. We have more work to do correcting our positions than they do. We need to be seen as their friend, rather than as the group most frequently insulting them.
 
Give them a hundred years or so. That's how long it took the Democrat party to support racial equality under the law after the passage of the 14th Amendment.
 
Anyone know how the ACLU rationalizes their refusal to support the now extablished individual right to keep and bear arms?
Click to expand...

Their website simply says that they disagree with Heller that the Second guarantees an individual right.

Like most anti groups, they don't really know "why", it's just a feeling they have.

Which is why it's nearly impossible to debate with an anti. How do you debate "feelings"?
 
Speculating about where the national ACLU will go if McDonald goes our way isn't a legal discussion, it's philosophy or politics.

There's an Activism thread going right now that looks at swaying the ACLU to accept/adopt the individual right interpretation of SCOTUS and abandoning the old collective right interp they cling to. The best bet is to sway the state organizations towards the individual right interp. If enough of them will adopt the individual right interp then we will end up swaying the national ACLU to that point as well (or gutting their view). If McDonald goes our way then the state ACLU organizations will be much easier to change and expending the effort on the national won't be needed.
 
I agree with hso, the only avenue of influence for the ACLU are the local chapters. However, I don't think it will really matter, after Heller the response of the National ACLU to the members who disagreed was basically ****.
 
Last edited:
smoking357 said:
The better question is whether gun owners will support the ACLU's agenda?

We need to come to them before we can expect them to come to us. So many gun owners approve of such things as:

1. State-sponsored religion;
2. Discrimination against homosexuals;
3. Keeping Guantanamo Bay open and not extending civil rights to the prisoners held there;
4. Invasions of privacy under the "War on Terror;"
5. Keeping drugs illegal;
6. Joe Arpaio's prisoner abuse;
7. Allowing the military to recruit young people aggressively;
8. Allowing police to use Tasers;
9. Banning flag burning;
10. Capital punishment;
11. etc.,

Civil rights are not severable, and the ACLU more frequently sees us across the table than on the same side of it. We have more work to do correcting our positions than they do. We need to be seen as their friend, rather than as the group most frequently insulting them.
Click to expand...
The ACLU is a communist front organization, always has been, always will be! Suggesting that "Americans" must "move towards them" is simply ridiculous, the ACLU is an actively subversive organization dedicated to the abolition of the 2nd Amendment, it's an attack machine of the committed left aimed directly at the heart of middle America!
 
A few ACLU chapters have already begun supporting the 2A as an individual right.

They'll do what their membership wants them to do.
 
A few ACLU chapters have already begun supporting the 2A as an individual right.
Click to expand...

There are a few STATE level organizations that do, but they do not receive any support for that work through the national organization.

They operate as separate entities. It is pretty funny, the differences. The Texas ACLU has been in several pro gun fights over the years. Strange how it varies so much.
 
Some state level ACLUs have decided to go with the flow, but the national ACLU refuses to even acknowledge the Heller victory. They have decided to ignore what the Supreme Court has said in the Heller case, and simply go with the militia interpretation that has been overruled. And they come out and say this outright on their website. Which basically means they are a joke to civil rights, because they are treating Supreme Court decisions like a buffet and only actively getting behind the ones they agree with while ignoring the ones they don't. The 5-4 victory we are about to get in the McDonald case will not change that. The national ACLU will outright ignore it and put something on their website to the effect of "we don't agree, our views are right, the SCOTUS is wrong, what we think is more important than the SCOTUS, and the 2nd Amendment still doesn't exist as far as we are concerned."
 
mljdeckard said:
smoking357,

Your post is generally broad and overinclusive.

And yes, I support the majority of the things you named.
Click to expand...

Too broad? No. The issues were taken from the ACLU's website. That organization is the subject of the thread.

While civil libertarians may quibble about an issue, here and there, disagreement with the ACLU on two or more of the cited issues calls one's commitment to civil rights seriously into question.

They'll be better toward us as we get better toward them.
 
Deanimator said:
Give them a hundred years or so. That's how long it took the Democrat party to support racial equality under the law after the passage of the 14th Amendment.
Click to expand...
I'm not so sure. The Democratic party was able to turn non-racist after the racists left to the Republican party due to the Southern Strategy. Anti-gun people can belong to the ACLU and Brady bunch at the same time.

The better question is whether gun owners will support the ACLU's agenda?

We need to come to them before we can expect them to come to us. So many gun owners approve of such things as:

1. State-sponsored religion;
2. Discrimination against homosexuals;
3. Keeping Guantanamo Bay open and not extending civil rights to the prisoners held there;
4. Invasions of privacy under the "War on Terror;"
5. Keeping drugs illegal;
6. Joe Arpaio's prisoner abuse;
7. Allowing the military to recruit young people aggressively;
8. Allowing police to use Tasers;
9. Banning flag burning;
10. Capital punishment;
11. etc.,
Click to expand...
"Like most anti groups, they don't really know "why", it's just a feeling they have."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Heller / Individual Rights / ACLU Policy #47
Replies
20
Views
1K
Ratzinger_p38
R
A
  • Locked
Nevada ACLU supports an individualgun rights
Replies
4
Views
350
ozwyn
O
Cavalier Knight
  • Locked
ACLU Second Amendment
Replies
4
Views
514
TexasRifleman
T
R
  • Locked
Nevada ACLU supports an individual’s right to bear arms
Replies
3
Views
456
Art Eatman
A
J
  • Locked
One in a row for the ACLU
Replies
2
Views
527
rock jock
R
Back
Top