-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
ACLU takes on Gun rights case?
- Thread starter thx997303
- Start date
R a Z o R
Banned
imported post
I'm questioning if Errol Houston , Jr. has a prior rap sheet and if this case was dropped because of lack or a technicality .
If this is the case then I can see the anti Second Amendment ACLU making a fool of themselves by taking this extreme position .
If Mr. Houston is a indeed a BG and uses the gun the ACLU gets back for him , the ACLU can bring out this soiled diaper case for all to smell . With so many ligitament , IMHO , situations the ACLU could be involved they areweird and they smell like crap too .
I'm questioning if Errol Houston , Jr. has a prior rap sheet and if this case was dropped because of lack or a technicality .
If this is the case then I can see the anti Second Amendment ACLU making a fool of themselves by taking this extreme position .
If Mr. Houston is a indeed a BG and uses the gun the ACLU gets back for him , the ACLU can bring out this soiled diaper case for all to smell . With so many ligitament , IMHO , situations the ACLU could be involved they areweird and they smell like crap too .
Statesman
Regular Member
imported post
The sky is falling. :shock:
The sky is falling. :shock:
R a Z o R
Banned
imported post
The ACLU web page states their view and position on the 2Aas beingthe same as all left wing extremist groups point of view . . . the 2A is a collective rather than an individual right .
http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/35904res20020304.html
I hope Mr. Houston becomes a national hero , so we can claim another victory from the immature left .
The ACLU web page states their view and position on the 2Aas beingthe same as all left wing extremist groups point of view . . . the 2A is a collective rather than an individual right .
http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/35904res20020304.html
I hope Mr. Houston becomes a national hero , so we can claim another victory from the immature left .
Task Force 16
Campaign Veteran
imported post
I'd be interested to know why Mr. Houston wasn't prosecuted? Did the NOPD screw up in the arrest?
If they didn't prosecute (and convict) they shouldn't have any grounds to confiscate his property.
I'd be interested to know why Mr. Houston wasn't prosecuted? Did the NOPD screw up in the arrest?
If they didn't prosecute (and convict) they shouldn't have any grounds to confiscate his property.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Razor, will you give it a rest, for just once?
Razor, will you give it a rest, for just once?
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
marshaul wrote:
Why??? He's right! The ACLU position on the 2nd Amendment would strip every single one of us not in the military or police force of our right to keep and bear arms... the ACLU are just a bunch of scumbag communists and deserve nothing less than scorn and a persistent offensive against them to try and make them as insignificant as possible. They are collectivists and should be demonized as the SOBs they are, as all collectivists would enslave us given half the chance.
ACLU = modern day Nazis.
:cuss:
marshaul wrote:
Why??? He's right! The ACLU position on the 2nd Amendment would strip every single one of us not in the military or police force of our right to keep and bear arms... the ACLU are just a bunch of scumbag communists and deserve nothing less than scorn and a persistent offensive against them to try and make them as insignificant as possible. They are collectivists and should be demonized as the SOBs they are, as all collectivists would enslave us given half the chance.
ACLU = modern day Nazis.
:cuss:
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Wow, I've never heard that before. :quirky
But seriously, I'd be interested to read intelligent analysis, rather than foaming-at-the-mouth BS.
Nothing in this case has anything to do with communism, collectivism, child molesters, or any other such rubbish. That some members or admin of the ACLU may agree with or defend (or have in the past defended) any or all of those things seems to me wholly irrelevant.
The ACLU works primarily within the courts, and to my knowledge they've yet to make any legal attempts to implement communism, collectivism, ban guns, etc.
Considering the context, neither your post nor Razor's bear even the slightest mark of objectivity, nor any relevance.
At the very least, I have yet to read a coherent statement relating their status as child molesting, enslaving collectivist communists to their defense of what appears to be a 2nd amendment case. Let's try to keep our eye on the ball. if you suspect an ulterior motive, please try to convey it in a rational way, devoid of irrelevant, mindless screaming.
And, who gives a damn whether the guy has a rap sheet from here to Texas? If he has standing in court over a confiscated gun, presumably he has the legal right to possess a gun, which means he's not a convicted felon. As TaskForce said, if they didn't prosecute they don't have grounds to confiscate his property. All the misdemeanors in the world don't justify government violation of property rights without due process
But that's classic authoritarianism for you. Rights are great, but then you scream bloody murder the instant they apply to someone whose record isn't spotless.
"Forget defending our rights, this guy was a misdemeanant!!!!11!one"
This site is about gun rights. Which side are you guys on, anyway?
It doesn't weaken rights to defend them even in cases where the rights-possessor isn't Mr. Rogers. Quite the contrary.
Wow, I've never heard that before. :quirky
But seriously, I'd be interested to read intelligent analysis, rather than foaming-at-the-mouth BS.
Nothing in this case has anything to do with communism, collectivism, child molesters, or any other such rubbish. That some members or admin of the ACLU may agree with or defend (or have in the past defended) any or all of those things seems to me wholly irrelevant.
The ACLU works primarily within the courts, and to my knowledge they've yet to make any legal attempts to implement communism, collectivism, ban guns, etc.
Considering the context, neither your post nor Razor's bear even the slightest mark of objectivity, nor any relevance.
At the very least, I have yet to read a coherent statement relating their status as child molesting, enslaving collectivist communists to their defense of what appears to be a 2nd amendment case. Let's try to keep our eye on the ball. if you suspect an ulterior motive, please try to convey it in a rational way, devoid of irrelevant, mindless screaming.
And, who gives a damn whether the guy has a rap sheet from here to Texas? If he has standing in court over a confiscated gun, presumably he has the legal right to possess a gun, which means he's not a convicted felon. As TaskForce said, if they didn't prosecute they don't have grounds to confiscate his property. All the misdemeanors in the world don't justify government violation of property rights without due process
But that's classic authoritarianism for you. Rights are great, but then you scream bloody murder the instant they apply to someone whose record isn't spotless.
"Forget defending our rights, this guy was a misdemeanant!!!!11!one"
This site is about gun rights. Which side are you guys on, anyway?
It doesn't weaken rights to defend them even in cases where the rights-possessor isn't Mr. Rogers. Quite the contrary.
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
you would defend such scum marshaul... typical leftist...
Their position on almost everything is a collectivist position... their position on the 2nd Amendment is as unsupportable as any other leftist moron including all those on the Supreme Court.
For anyone to even claim the founding fathers intentions were to give the right to bear arms only to the collective would be to completely dismiss the writings of the founding fathers... and here, because I know leftists are inherently lazy... I'll re-post just some of their thoughts on the "individual's right" to keep and bear arms:
____________________________________________________________________
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."~ George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves..." ~ Richard Henry Lee, writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." ~ Zachariah Johnson, Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms;..." ~ Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." ~ George Washington, First President of the United States
"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." ~ Thomas Paine
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." ~ Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788
"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun." ~ Patrick Henry, American Patriot
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" ~ Patrick Henry, American Patriot
"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson, Writer of the Declaration of Independence and third President of the United States
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ..." ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.
"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." ~ Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8
"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." ~ John Adams
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, that could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it." ~ James Madison, "The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared," 46 Federalist New York Packet, January 29, 1788
___________________________________________________________________
So excuse the hell out of me for not giving those who put up such weak arguments a fair listening to. The minute they begin to lie... I turn off. They either are willfully ignorant, or criminally aware... and as collectivists usually are... I assume they are always criminally aware of what the founder's real beliefs were as you can read the reams of work they left behind.
No marshaul, I will not argue with you on some false premise... I reject your premise completely as worthless drivel based upon liars that cite lies as proof their positionshave merit.
you would defend such scum marshaul... typical leftist...
Their position on almost everything is a collectivist position... their position on the 2nd Amendment is as unsupportable as any other leftist moron including all those on the Supreme Court.
For anyone to even claim the founding fathers intentions were to give the right to bear arms only to the collective would be to completely dismiss the writings of the founding fathers... and here, because I know leftists are inherently lazy... I'll re-post just some of their thoughts on the "individual's right" to keep and bear arms:
____________________________________________________________________
"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."~ George Mason, Co-author of the Second Amendment, during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves..." ~ Richard Henry Lee, writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.
"The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." ~ Zachariah Johnson, Elliot's Debates, vol. 3 "The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution."
"And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms;..." ~ Samuel Adams quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, "Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State"
"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence ... from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good." ~ George Washington, First President of the United States
"The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them." ~ Thomas Paine
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." ~ Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788
"The great object is that every man be armed." and "Everyone who is able may have a gun." ~ Patrick Henry, American Patriot
"Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?" ~ Patrick Henry, American Patriot
"Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not." ~ Thomas Jefferson, Writer of the Declaration of Independence and third President of the United States
"The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that ... it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; ..." ~ Thomas Jefferson, letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.
"The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." ~ Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-8
"Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense." ~ John Adams
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, that could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it." ~ James Madison, "The Influence of the State and Federal Governments Compared," 46 Federalist New York Packet, January 29, 1788
___________________________________________________________________
So excuse the hell out of me for not giving those who put up such weak arguments a fair listening to. The minute they begin to lie... I turn off. They either are willfully ignorant, or criminally aware... and as collectivists usually are... I assume they are always criminally aware of what the founder's real beliefs were as you can read the reams of work they left behind.
No marshaul, I will not argue with you on some false premise... I reject your premise completely as worthless drivel based upon liars that cite lies as proof their positionshave merit.
Washintonian_For_Liberty
Regular Member
imported post
marshaul wrote:
We're on the side of Individual Liberty... and the ACLU is not. We will never trust them because behind every act that seems to be in support of what we believe, there is that unrelenting push towards collectivism that they will never stop supporting. They are leftists and all leftists are scum.
The only good leftist is one thathas shuffled off this mortal coil. More people have died because of collectivists than because of any other ideology, and considering that includes religion, that's saying something. In the 20th Century alone, you have the Soviet Union killing more than 100 million in its 80 year purge either by actual killing or famine from really messed up central planning... and then there's China... out of all figures, the most reliable put the death count from 1945 to 1985 anywhere from 45 million to 65 million. Nazi Germany... fascists and yes, Socialist Corporatism was responsible for WW2 in Europe which was responsible for the death of more than 38 million people (and that was only in four and a half years). The number of Chinese killed by Japanese is not known, but some low estimates put the number anywhere from 12 to 25 million. Japan was a different type of Fascism, yet their ethics were almost wholly collectivist as the individual did not matter in WW2 Japan.
Add those numbers up and you get well over 200 million dead because of collectivist goals... and we haven't even gotten to Pol Pot and other notorious leftists of the 20th Century...
So when the ACLU is only interested in pushing its collectivist agenda... I'm only willing to push back... with bullets if necessary.
marshaul wrote:
We're on the side of Individual Liberty... and the ACLU is not. We will never trust them because behind every act that seems to be in support of what we believe, there is that unrelenting push towards collectivism that they will never stop supporting. They are leftists and all leftists are scum.
The only good leftist is one thathas shuffled off this mortal coil. More people have died because of collectivists than because of any other ideology, and considering that includes religion, that's saying something. In the 20th Century alone, you have the Soviet Union killing more than 100 million in its 80 year purge either by actual killing or famine from really messed up central planning... and then there's China... out of all figures, the most reliable put the death count from 1945 to 1985 anywhere from 45 million to 65 million. Nazi Germany... fascists and yes, Socialist Corporatism was responsible for WW2 in Europe which was responsible for the death of more than 38 million people (and that was only in four and a half years). The number of Chinese killed by Japanese is not known, but some low estimates put the number anywhere from 12 to 25 million. Japan was a different type of Fascism, yet their ethics were almost wholly collectivist as the individual did not matter in WW2 Japan.
Add those numbers up and you get well over 200 million dead because of collectivist goals... and we haven't even gotten to Pol Pot and other notorious leftists of the 20th Century...
So when the ACLU is only interested in pushing its collectivist agenda... I'm only willing to push back... with bullets if necessary.
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
You're right, I shouldn't have said anything. After all, the ACLU is responsible for the holocaust, Stalin's purges, etc.
What was I thinking? :quirky
You're right, I shouldn't have said anything. After all, the ACLU is responsible for the holocaust, Stalin's purges, etc.
What was I thinking? :quirky
KansasMustang
Regular Member
imported post
Just me sayin it, and no offense to anyone intended. But I'm wondering the social background of this individual ? Is he a member of a minority? Since the ACLU will almost NEVER take on a case for the "Caucasion majority" that's what I'm wondering? Call me racist I think not, call me racially sensitive, yeah okay. But in this case I'll side with Washingtonian and say that under no circumstances do I trust the ACLU's motives.
The Founders were very clear about the 2A. In all communications and papers there is NO doubt that they wanted ALL citizens capable and rightfully to be able to protect themselves.
Just me sayin it, and no offense to anyone intended. But I'm wondering the social background of this individual ? Is he a member of a minority? Since the ACLU will almost NEVER take on a case for the "Caucasion majority" that's what I'm wondering? Call me racist I think not, call me racially sensitive, yeah okay. But in this case I'll side with Washingtonian and say that under no circumstances do I trust the ACLU's motives.
The Founders were very clear about the 2A. In all communications and papers there is NO doubt that they wanted ALL citizens capable and rightfully to be able to protect themselves.
R a Z o R
Banned
imported post
marshaul wrote:
A dirty diaper is still a dirty diaper by any other name .
Gun control is still control gun control by any collectivist's agenda .
marshaul wrote:
A dirty diaper is still a dirty diaper by any other name .
Gun control is still control gun control by any collectivist's agenda .
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Where is the evidence that this lawsuit is intended to further the cause of gun control?
Where is the evidence that this lawsuit is intended to further the cause of gun control?
R a Z o R
Banned
imported post
marshaul wrote:
Past evidence , action , and the ACLU's own written policy statment on gun control .
marshaul wrote:
Past evidence , action , and the ACLU's own written policy statment on gun control .
marshaul
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Actually, they claim they don't take a position on gun control. This would be in line with their mission statement:
I really don't see how this has anything to do with gun control.
The ACLU may not disapprove of gun control, but that fact does not itself provide empirical evidence for their working to implement it one way or another.
This appears to be an issue of courts following the law. Which is something the ACLU does sue over.
Actually, they claim they don't take a position on gun control. This would be in line with their mission statement:
I really don't see how this has anything to do with gun control.
The ACLU may not disapprove of gun control, but that fact does not itself provide empirical evidence for their working to implement it one way or another.
This appears to be an issue of courts following the law. Which is something the ACLU does sue over.
R a Z o R
Banned
imported post
R a Z o R wrote:
R a Z o R wrote:
Weird .
Nutczak
Regular Member
imported post
I copiedthequote belowfrom the ACLU webpage, it is very clear that they do not support an individuals right to keep and bear arms.
ACLU POSITION
I copiedthequote belowfrom the ACLU webpage, it is very clear that they do not support an individuals right to keep and bear arms.
ACLU POSITION
So, they only protect the civil liberites that they feel are correct! To hell with the 2A rights! say the ACLU
Statesman
Regular Member
imported post
Nutczak wrote:
Nutczak wrote:
Now I see why so many people hate the ACLU. The organization, collectively, can go to hell. Or, would they rather see us all in state run militias, like it used to be? :lol:
vbnative73
Regular Member
imported post
I've used their motto for my own purpose:
I carry a firearm "because freedom can't protect itself." I have no idea what the ACLU is for.
I've used their motto for my own purpose:
I carry a firearm "because freedom can't protect itself." I have no idea what the ACLU is for.