The Fair and Balanced ACLU. These guys are SO funny!

[Shamus]

I understand that Toad, but as I said they are not right on everything.

I rather doubt that had the decision gone the other way the NRA would have said "well the SC has spoken, we have nothing else to say".

We know that abortion opponents have been fighting a SC decision for the last 35 years and stand a good chance of getting it overturned if they can get the current court to hear a case.

I don't hold the ACLU to a higher standard than other action groups, when I think they are right, I support them, when wrong I don't, simple as that.

shamus 

[lazs2]

ya know..  I had asked earlier what the ACLU would do if the SC ruled the second an individual right.

My take on their position has always been that they were saying "sorry.. we would love to help all you gun owners with your civil rights and constitutional rights but it sure seems that the second has been interpreted as a collective right and not an individual one.. we really have no choice."

That is the impression they have given on their website and in emails to me..  their "interpretation" was based on past SC rulings and... they even quote parts of past rulings to excuse there lack of support for second amendment rights.

They claim that they have no agenda.. that they are only going by the constitution and sc rulings on it.

now that the SC has ruled.. for the first time.. on the individual rights thing.. they are saying that they know more than the SC.

They are admitting their agenda.. they have no rock to hide under anymore...

Their agenda is out there for all to see.

Would shamus excuse them and support them if the amendment they picked to ignore was say.. the first?

To me.. the second is more important or at least as important as the first.

To subscribe to any "collective rights" theory on amendments is to simply admit an agenda of socialism.

At least we drug the cockroaches out into the light..

I am looking forward to the democrat cockroaches that will be drug into the light over this decision..  osamabama is tap dancing mightily but eventually someone is gonna ask him if the laws he voted for in say chicago are just and a good idea.. 

lazs

[lazs2]

shamus.. the NRA is nothing more than an advocacy group for gun rights.. they would be expected to say the SC were wrong if they decided for some bogus collective right thing.   

The ACLU is pretending to be advocates of individual rights and simply wishing for the constitution to be upheld with no hidden agenda.

They are now in a position to admit that they are not just neutral but have an anti second amendment agenda.  That individual rights are not important to them in at least this case.

the "sorry, we would love to help you gun owners but legally you don't have a leg to stand on." thing is now thrown out the window.. they now have to admit that they didn't want to help, not because they couldn't but because they hate you having the right.

I think this is a huge admission exposure.

lazs

[Toad]

Shamus, the difference between the NRA and the ACLU is clear.

The NRA is all about the 2nd Amendment, the RKBA. That is their SOLE focus. They never said they'd defend or fight the right to abortion. It is out of their scope.

The ACLU is all about defending ALL of our Constitutional rights. As such they are hypocritical to the extreme by denying the recent individual right ruling. Defending the 2nd is clearly in their scope. In the past, they dodged that responsibility by clinging to the collective right misinterpretation. Now that their fig leaf is blown away, they announce they will ignore the ruling.


<edit> laz beat me to it.

[lazs2]

you said it better.

lazs

[Shamus]

Thats right Toad, the NRA is all about the 2nd, and if lazs is correct, and I suspect he is, they would not have accepted the SC decision had it gone the other way. Would that make them hypocritical?

If you want to call the ACLU hypocritical on this thats fairly accurate, I'm not going to defend them, but it is also not going to change my opinion of a lot of the good work they do.

shamus

[Toad]

I think you are dodging the issue Shamus.

The NRA has always been clear about their reading of the 2nd as an individual right. I would expect them to oppose any SC decision that went against that interpretation. They have never said the SC is the supreme arbiter of our rights. To the contrary, like Jefferson (and now the SC), they have maintained that the RKBA is an existing right of all mankind that predates the Constitution.

The ACLU, OTOH, presents itself as a defender of our Constitutional rights and has repeatedly held up the SC as the final arbiter of those rights. Now, with respect to just the 2nd Amendment, the SC is wrong and is no longer the final arbiter of those rights. You can't have it both ways. If they're going to defend ALL our rights, they have to defend the 2nd as well. To do otherwise is indeed hypocritical.

[lazs2]

yep..well put.. the NRA believes as the SC now states it does that the second is not a right conferred upon us by a gracious government but that it simply states a pre existing right.

On the other hand.. the ACLU are lawyers.. using the law to bludgen their way.   They use the law to uphold what they say are our constitutional rights.   Now... they ignore the law so that they can continue to tramp on ... or at least ignore.. our constitutional and god given rights as free men.

I expected no less but am glad that they have at last been drug out into the light... many many people will re-evaluate what the real agenda of the ACLU is after this.. it is very revealing.



lazs

[Shamus]

Shamus, it's not if they are an exact match for YOUR opinions in legal cases.

It's whether or not they can profess that a SC decision is the final say in cases where the ruling goes their way and then totally ignore the SC decision when they don't agree with it.

So the above would apply to my opinions or the ACLU's opinions, but not to the NRA's?.

shamus

[Toad]

You do acknowledge that the NRA is a narrowly focused organization that states its purpose as defending the 2nd Amendment?  That it makes sense for them to continue to defend a right that pre-exists the Constitution?

You do realize that the ACLU purports to defend ALL of our rights as enumerated by our Constitution with the SC as final arbiter?

You don't see the difference? Come now.

[Carrel]

In 1939, USA vs. Miller, the SC ruled gun ownership to be a collective right.

[Shamus]

Sure I acknowledge that the NRA's position is to defend the 2nd and I stated my opinion of the ACLU's position on the latest SC ruling as well in my very first post.

I find it interesting that the ACLU is to be vilified for not accepting a SC ruling but it is expected that the NRA would fight on had the ruling gone the other way is all, just does not seem consistent.

Well this has been fun gents, but I am gonna go fly now 

shamus   

[Toad]

In 1939, USA vs. Miller, the SC ruled gun ownership to be a collective right.

That is incorrect. Read the text of Miller. That is one of those falsehoods that has been repeated so often that it is taken as truth. Miller doesn't even address individual right; that idea is a fabrication.

I ask you to quote text of the Miller decision that calls it out as a collective right. As Scalia pointed out:

“And what is, according to JUSTICE STEVENS, the holding of Miller that demands such obeisance? That the Second Amendment ‘protects the right to keep and bear arms for certain military purposes, but that it does not curtail the legislature’s power to regulate the nonmilitary use and ownership of weapons.” Nothing so clearly demonstrates the weakness of JUSTICE STEVENS’ case. Miller did not hold that and cannot possibly be read to have held that.” (49)

“Miller stands only for the proposition that the Second Amendment right, whatever its nature, extends only to certain types of weapons.”

If you actually read the text, that is what you will find there.

[Toad]

Sure I acknowledge that the NRA's position is to defend the 2nd and I stated my opinion of the ACLU's position on the latest SC ruling as well in my very first post.

shamus   

Again, the NRA has never acknowledged any governmental authority over a pre-existing right.

OTOH, the ACLU routinely acknowledges the SC as the final arbiter in Constitutional cases.

MAJOR difference there.

[Holden McGroin]

It's just that the ACLU believes that the right to keep and bear arms is a collective one and therefore when a trigger is pulled, we do it collectively.  This is not hypoctical at all, as we now that we are collectively at fault for gun crime.  We all know that societal influences caused the individual to pick up a gun and walk into a 7-11 and demand that the cashier empty the cash drawer.  It is the fault of us all.