ACLU and Gun Rights

CarryOpen · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

I'm still waiting for the ACLU haters to talk about the ACLU stance on RKBA. None of their other politics have anything to do with it. Do only Christians own guns? Do illegals want to take our guns away? Is suing Arizona for a law that violates civil rights somehow not in line with our goals?

sudden valley gunner · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

eye95 · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

Washintonian_For_Liberty wrote:

The ACLU is not nor will it ever be our ally or friend on gun rights...

ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right.

The ACLU is NOT to be trusted when it comes to individual rights... they don't care about individual rights... they are a collectivist organization.

I don't damn the organization... thier own words damn themselves.

+1

eye95 · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

I've read the whole law. That isn't in there--not even close.

GLOCK21GB · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

25 Million plus Illegals & their Anchor babies in America taking away AMERICAN JOBS, causing Americans TAXES to go sky high to pay for illegals health care & welfare, mean while ILLEGALS PAY NO or Very Little taxes...... Do you think it's fair that Arizona Tax payers have to foot all these bills ???? !!!!!! << it's BILLIONS of dollars every year !!!! YES it seem's perfectly constitutional to me...kick ALL OF THEM Illegals out & their KIDS TOO. or let American citizens do it their own way.......

a little profiling never hurt anyone....

25sierraman · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

Fighting on behalf of Illegals isnt a very noble cause when their very presence in the country is breaking the law. I think they had the right idea in Arizona just very very very poor execution.

flagellum · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

Well, this post USED to be about the ACLU...

Washintonian_For_Liberty · Apr 28, 2010

imported post

flagellum wrote:

Well, this post USED to be about the ACLU...

The position of the ACLU is clear....

ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right.

And in spite of them taking on a case here or there.... the official position of the ACLU is very much opposed to INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY!!!

Read their own words if you don't agree. The ACLU has one goal... destroy the Republic and usher in a Democracy to speed up the Communist take over of this country.

CarryOpen · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

Click to expand...

25 Million plus Illegals & their Anchor babies in America taking away AMERICAN JOBS, causing Americans TAXES to go sky high to pay for illegals health care & welfare, mean while ILLEGALS PAY NO or Very Little taxes...... Do you think it's fair that Arizona Tax payers have to foot all these bills ???? !!!!!! << it's BILLIONS of dollars every year !!!! YES it seem's perfectly constitutional to me...kick ALL OF THEM Illegals out & their KIDS TOO. or let American citizens do it their own way....... a little profiling never hurt anyone....

Please explain what this has to do with the ACLU stance on RKBA or OC. We get it, you don't like immigrants, you don't like the ACLU, you love guns. Now try to get on topic and talk about the ACLU and guns, not some other issue that has nothing to do with RKBA or OC.

__ · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

Aww right my brotha! follow him to wisconsin to find that he's a sami-unemployed hater.

sudden valley gunner · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

eye95 wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

Click to expand...

I've read the whole law. That isn't in there--not even close.

No but show me your papers is wrong. And who will be the targets? White folk?

I do believe we need border/immigration control, but think that this law goes about it the wrong way.

Stop freebie programs, stop prohibition, allow ranchers to protect their land and let people patrol the border and the majority of the problem will go away.

I re-read the bill with a more open mind, it's not enforced unless you are stopped for or approached for committing any offense. I get that, but I have been pulled over on trumped up offenses from LEO before. I carry sterile while walking around, I wouldn't be able to produce ID, and strongly believe in our right to do this. What kind of effect would it have on this?

But do have to admit the media hype about this bill is very, well like usual, biased.

eye95 · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

sudden valley gunner wrote:

eye95 wrote:

sudden valley gunner wrote:

Ummmm the new law in Arizona is unconstitutional.

Show me papers because you are brown seem constitutional to you?

Click to expand...

I've read the whole law. That isn't in there--not even close.

Click to expand...

No but show me your papers is wrong. And who will be the targets? White folk?

I do believe we need border/immigration control, but think that this law goes about it the wrong way.

Stop freebie programs, stop prohibition, allow ranchers to protect their land and let people patrol the border and the majority of the problem will go away.

I re-read the bill with a more open mind, it's not enforced unless you are stopped for or approached for committing any offense. I get that, but I have been pulled over on trumped up offenses from LEO before. I carry sterile while walking around, I wouldn't be able to produce ID, and strongly believe in our right to do this. What kind of effect would it have on this?

But do have to admit the media hype about this bill is very, well like usual, biased.

"Show me your papers" is NOT in the law. :banghead: So, why do we keep discussing it, perpetuating the MYTH that it is. RAS is still needed to stop. RAS is still needed to check documents. Not only would that be the law had this particular law not addressed it, this law specifically addresses the issue, requiring RAS.

Folks, read the law. I did. Don't just take my word (or the words of those who are deceiving you). Read it for yourselves!

CarryOpen · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

The law requires them to request documentation during any lawful encounter where suspicion arises. This includes lawful contact resulting from witness interviews, police calls, flat tires etc. They do not need RAS to have a lawful encounter with you.

Police cannot choose to ignore these things during lawful contact, meaning that they will be even more ostracized in the community and locals will be less likely to initiate contact to get criminals off the streets.

eye95 · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

CarryOpen wrote:

The law requires them to request documentation during any lawful encounter where suspicion arises. This includes lawful contact resulting from witness interviews, police calls, flat tires etc. They do not need RAS to have a lawful encounter with you.

Police cannot choose to ignore these things during lawful contact, meaning that they will be even more ostracized in the community and locals will be less likely to initiate contact to get criminals off the streets.

You are correct in that LEOs come into contact with LACs all the time. However the false claim that is circulating is that a cop can walk up to someone who looks like he might be of Mexican heritage and say, "Papers, please." Absent RAS (or some other legal reason) he may not even approach the person. Even after he legally approaches the person, he cannot demand documentation unless he has RAS specific to the person's legal right or permission to be in the country.

One more thing. You say suspicion is necessary. They not only have to have suspicion before requesting documentation. They must have reasonable suspicion--which in any court in the land would not include skin color or accent.

The Donkey · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

1. As some posts acknolwedge, ACLU is not a monolithic organization: what they do is largely a function of the Boards of individual chapters.

They defend the rights of conservatives and far right wingers as well as liberals. Consider, e.g. the Skokie, IL march that cost ACLU chapters across the country close to half of their membership and funding.

2. Mental exercise: what is "reasonable suspicion" of unlawful alienage? How would you recognize it in a man on the street? Appearance? Dress? Language? Associations? Jobs?

What, for that matter, is "lawful contact?" Does it include, for example, when someone reports a crime, or applies to be admitted to a public school? What are the consequences inthe Arizona law if a policeforce decides not to stop people based on yourway of forming "reasonable suspicion?"

eye95 · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

Nazis are not right-wingers. That association is used by the left to insult the right. As a matter of fact, the Progressive movement in the US was enamored of the fascists in Europe in the 30's. After the Nazis and other fascists were found to be bad guys, the political left started the myth that Nazis and fascists were on the right side of the political spectrum.

In fact, they have more in common with today's political left. They believe that they know better than the great unwashed and ought to exercise governmental control over that unwashed for their own good.

On reasonable suspicion: What matters is that reasonable suspicion is NOT, as some are claiming the law allows, the fact that the person appears to be of Mexican/Latino/Hispanic descent. Your argument can be used on every current law in the US today that allows LEOs to stop citizens and provides restrictions on those stops. The new law in Arizona today is no different than all other current law in the US in regard to LEOs making stops.

The Donkey · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

eye95 wrote:

Nazis are not right-wingers. That association is used by the left to insult the right. As a matter of fact, the Progressive movement in the US was enamored of the fascists in Europe in the 30's. After the Nazis and other fascists were found to be bad guys, the political left started the myth that Nazis and fascists were on the right side of the political spectrum.

In fact, they have more in common with today's political left. They believe that they know better than the great unwashed and ought to exercise governmental control over that unwashed for their own good.

On reasonable suspicion: What matters is that reasonable suspicion is NOT, as some are claiming the law allows, the fact that the person appears to be of Mexican/Latino/Hispanic descent. Your argument can be used on every current law in the US today that allows LEOs to stop citizens and provides restrictions on those stops. The new law in Arizona today is no different than all other current law in the US in regard to LEOs making stops.

No offense intended. Far as I am concerned, Nazis are off the scale.

Needless to say, though, Nazis are not very popular with the left either -- ACLU believes in civil liberties for all.

david.ross · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

CarryOpen wrote:

Is suing Arizona for a law that violates civil rights somehow not in line with our goals?

The illegal immigrant laws in Arizona don't violate civil rights. Guess what, Federal law already states immigrants must carry their government issued papers.

I wrote a few words on the topic: http://insane-kangaroo.livejournal.com/58680.html

If you knew anything about the law, you'd see the difference makes illegal immigration and support of illegal immigrants an extremely severe crime.

I'm Hispanic, and I support Arizona.

eye95 · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

The Donkey wrote:

eye95 wrote:

Nazis are not right-wingers. That association is used by the left to insult the right. As a matter of fact, the Progressive movement in the US was enamored of the fascists in Europe in the 30's. After the Nazis and other fascists were found to be bad guys, the political left started the myth that Nazis and fascists were on the right side of the political spectrum.

In fact, they have more in common with today's political left. They believe that they know better than the great unwashed and ought to exercise governmental control over that unwashed for their own good.

On reasonable suspicion: What matters is that reasonable suspicion is NOT, as some are claiming the law allows, the fact that the person appears to be of Mexican/Latino/Hispanic descent. Your argument can be used on every current law in the US today that allows LEOs to stop citizens and provides restrictions on those stops. The new law in Arizona today is no different than all other current law in the US in regard to LEOs making stops.

Click to expand...

No offense intended. Far as I am concerned, Nazis are off the scale.

Needless to say, though, Nazis are not very popular with the left either -- ACLU believes in civil liberties for all.

I disagree with that last statement. They often come down on the side of an issue that I believe restricts liberty. Relative to OCDO, it has been posted several times on this site that the ACLU has flat-out said that the 2A is a right of the collective and not the individual.

The Donkey · Apr 29, 2010

imported post

National ACLU does not set policy for individual chapters.

Best way to get 2A on the ACLU agenda is to run 2A supporters for local ACLU Boards.

ACLU and Gun Rights

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

New member

Regular Member

Well-known member

New member