• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Come OC at ACLU Event! September 9th

Lovenox

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
538
Location
Olympia
Went to the Cal-Anderson park today. Saw the rental house. A homeless man came up to me and asked if I was a bounty hunter. We talked for a while. Then 2 bike cops came up to me a talked for a while. They were impressed by how much of the law I knew and I showed them our flier. They said a bunch of people had called but that the dispatcher had told them that as long as I wasn't threatening anyone that it was legal. The cops just came by to see what was up. They asked me if I come to this park on a regular bases, and I said it was my first time, that I go to greenlake usally. They gave me the impression that they hadn't seen this in this park before. They were totally cool with it and respectful. I mentioned that they might see a couple of more open carry people at the aclu event and they said if they were all like me that would be great.


You should have taken note of their names and followed up with the chief and informed him how much you were impressed by the professionalism, courtesy, and tact. This could go a long way in paving the way for improved relations between the PD and OC'ers..just a thought.
 

boatswain

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2010
Messages
36
Location
WA
Long time lurker, first time poster.

Technically the ACLU allows state chapters to make their own minds up on Second Amendment cases, and there is evidence that their position is changing with the recent SCOTUS decisions. Florida, Nevada, Louisiana and Texas chapters of the ACLU certainly take firearm cases.

See the following article for recent examples:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jul/22/aclu-rethinking-second-amendment/

Several ACLU chapters have come right out and said it e.g. http://www.aclunv.org/aclu-nevada-supports-individual’s-right-bear-arms

In light of the United States Supreme Court's decision concerning the D.C. handgun ban (District of Columbia v. Heller) the ACLU of Nevada considers it important to clearly state its position regarding the right to bear arms. The Nevada ACLU respects the individual's right to bear arms subject to constitutionally permissible regulations. The ACLU of Nevada will defend this right as it defends other constitutional rights. This policy was formulated by our afilliate Board in light of both the U.S. Constitution and the clearly-stated individual right to bear arms as set out in the Nevada Constitution's Declaration of Rights.

Personally I am still mad at the WA ACLU for their weak stance on Prop 1068. I might find it in my heart to forgive them if they did something like Nevada!
 
Last edited:

Lovenox

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
538
Location
Olympia
Check the link in the first post.

Here is thier stance and after I read it how can any of the board members go??

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. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view.

The Supreme Court has now ruled otherwise. In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia.

The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.

 
Last edited:

j2l3

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
871
Location
Seattle, Washington, USA
Went to the Cal-Anderson park today. Saw the rental house. A homeless man came up to me and asked if I was a bounty hunter. We talked for a while. Then 2 bike cops came up to me a talked for a while. They were impressed by how much of the law I knew and I showed them our flier. They said a bunch of people had called but that the dispatcher had told them that as long as I wasn't threatening anyone that it was legal. The cops just came by to see what was up. They asked me if I come to this park on a regular bases, and I said it was my first time, that I go to greenlake usally. They gave me the impression that they hadn't seen this in this park before. They were totally cool with it and respectful. I mentioned that they might see a couple of more open carry people at the aclu event and they said if they were all like me that would be great.

This is what I would expect from the Seattle PD. They are well trained and not nearly the problem most people think they are. I know many SPD officers and universally, they support a persons right to arm themselves and defend themselves.

Usually, when an officer in Seattle has an issue, they are a transplant from somewhere else and have yet to lighten up and learn the laws here.
 

Lovenox

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
538
Location
Olympia
You inaccurately assume the only reason to go is to support the ACLU. I plan to attend OC in order to point out the folly of their 2nd Amendment position.

Point well taken. But it does appear that others are going in support of the ACLU. Are we going to show up as a divided body?
 

jt59

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2010
Messages
1,005
Location
Central South Sound
It seems the consensus of this thread is not so much to support, as much to show them the error of their ways....

I think t-shirts with their website quote and us OC'g would subtley get our point across. If we can connect to some friendly WA chapter membr's and ask them if they are aware of the position that Nevada took.......we may plant some seeds.

"Our rights depend on our willingness to defend them. Every day across this nation, new threats challenge the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You can defend liberty by supporting the ACLU today."


You inaccurately assume the only reason to go is to support the ACLU. I plan to attend OC in order to point out the folly of their 2nd Amendment position.
 

Bob Warden

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2009
Messages
192
Location
Kent, Washington, USA
It seems the consensus of this thread is not so much to support, as much to show them the error of their ways....

I think t-shirts with their website quote and us OC'g would subtley get our point across.
Or how about tee shirts with the crystal clear language of our state constitution:
"The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired"
ACLU WA frequently uses state law to advocate for liberty; why not in the case of bearing arms? I don't think there is a logically coherent answer to that question.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Last edited:

gogodawgs

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
5,669
Location
Federal Way, Washington, USA
I studied Constitutional Law in college...

and I genuinely enjoy the work that the ACLU has done for civil liberties. Especially regarding the 4th and 5th amendments. Most of my studies revolved around the 1st amendment. I always asked my professors questions in regards to the 2nd as great parallels exist.

You inaccurately assume the only reason to go is to support the ACLU. I plan to attend OC in order to point out the folly of their 2nd Amendment position.

Point well taken. But it does appear that others are going in support of the ACLU. Are we going to show up as a divided body?

It seems the consensus of this thread is not so much to support, as much to show them the error of their ways....

I think t-shirts with their website quote and us OC'g would subtley get our point across. If we can connect to some friendly WA chapter membr's and ask them if they are aware of the position that Nevada took.......we may plant some seeds.

"Our rights depend on our willingness to defend them. Every day across this nation, new threats challenge the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights. You can defend liberty by supporting the ACLU today."

Or how about tee shirts with the crystal clear language of our state constitution:
"The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired"
ACLU WA frequently uses state law to advocate for liberty; why not in the case of bearing arms? I don't think there is a logically coherent answer to that question.

The shirts are great, but a bit over the top. I would like to go and just ask pointed questions. I think that in the near future the ACLU will have to look upon the 2nd amendment just as they always have all the rest.
 

DoomGoober

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
63
But it does appear that others are going in support of the ACLU. Are we going to show up as a divided body?

I am a member of the ACLU and donate money to them every year. (I joke that my NRA membership and my ACLU card will catch fire in my wallet if they ever touch.) We may be divided on the ACLU in general but we're united in the belief that their NATIONAL position on the Second Amendment is wrong.

However, I should mention that although the ACLU, at a national level, believes an armed citizenry is a collective right, not individual, I don't believe they've filed any lawsuits directly anti-gun rights. It seems that their stance is very passive -- probably in an effort to keep donors happy.

In fact, a quick search of ACLU and gun rights yields only stories about local ACLU chapters protecting gun owners, if indirectly (usually in regards to police overstepping bounds in terms of search and seizure of guns):
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/us/05guns.html?_r=1
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/275781
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/07/16/pigs-fly-aclu-defends-gun-rights/

Finally, I found this quote from Nadine Strossen (a former ACLU president) which explains their stance in a nuanced way:

DS: Where do you stand on the Second Amendment and the rights of gun owners? Are the rights accorded to well-armed militias, or is it accorded to unfettered rights of individuals to own guns?

NS: I actually don’t think in reality that the difference is that profound, because when you look at the big debate, and you stated it well, does the government protect the individual right to bear arms, does it only protect a collective right through the state militias? Let’s assume for the sake of argument it does protect an individual right, it is no more absolute than freedom of speech or any other right in the Constitution. No right is absolute; the government is always allowed to restrict the right if it can satisfy Constitutional strict scrutiny and show the restriction is narrowly tailored to promote a goal of compelling importance. Ironically, the very first federal appellate court in recent history to hold that there was an individual right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, the Fifth Circuit, then went on to nevertheless uphold the particular restriction that was being challenged! Mainly, that the guy was under a restraining order for domestic abuse and he wasn’t allowed to possess a gun. The court said the Second Amendment protects your right, but this regulation doesn’t violate your right. So I don’t think it makes a big difference. And conversely, to say it’s not an individual right doesn’t mean that gun owners are without all rights, and the ACLU has often collaborated with gun owners rights organizations to defend their rights to privacy, to defend their rights to due process; in other words, they don’t forfeit all of their Constitutional rights just because they are gun owners, even if the Second Amendment doesn’t protect. So I think it’s more a philosophical debate than it has any practical difference.
 
Last edited:

Lovenox

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2010
Messages
538
Location
Olympia
I am a member of the ACLU and donate money to them every year. (I joke that my NRA membership and my ACLU card will catch fire in my wallet if they ever touch.) We may be divided on the ACLU in general but we're united in the belief that their NATIONAL position on the Second Amendment is wrong.

However, I should mention that although the ACLU, at a national level, believes an armed citizenry is a collective right, not individual, I don't believe they've filed any lawsuits directly anti-gun rights. It seems that their stance is very passive -- probably in an effort to keep donors happy.

In fact, a quick search of ACLU and gun rights yields only stories about local ACLU chapters protecting gun owners, if indirectly (usually in regards to police overstepping bounds in terms of search and seizure of guns):
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/05/us/05guns.html?_r=1
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/275781
http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2010/07/16/pigs-fly-aclu-defends-gun-rights/

Finally, I found this quote from Nadine Strossen (a former ACLU president) which explains their stance in a nuanced way:


Thanks for the links. Although I don't agree with thier postion it looks as though individual chapters have taken maverick actions and defended gun owners. But it still leaves me a little uneasy that an organization that champions civil liberites gets trip up on the verbiage of the language when we all know the Founding Fathers intent. And they arent unified on the matter.
 

DEROS72

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
2,817
Location
Valhalla
Gogodawgs and I are thinking of going to this as well .I would hand out pamphlets and FAQ's.
 

Iopencarry

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2010
Messages
637
Location
Oakley, California, United States
I was wondering the same thing! I carry as a political statement -- so isn't OC'ing also a form of speech?
It is in CA.

That is one of the reason why AB1934 (open carry ban) lost here last week. The author of the bill, in her statement to the Assm, said it was a form of protest. Which makes it also a 1st amendment issue.

Friends, I would love to be there with you, but being in CA makes it hard.

Have fun and carry on
 

DoomGoober

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2010
Messages
63
Reminder: This event is 9/9, Thursday. Hope to see some of you there.

Random aside: I know the organizer and I gave her a heads up that some OC'ers might be there. She just said, "Yay looking forward to seeing you!"

Either she didn't read the message or she doesn't care. :D
 

DEROS72

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
2,817
Location
Valhalla
I was going to ride with Gogodawgs but he indicated he won't be able to make it.So I would love to go if anyone could give me a lift.I'm in Seatac .
 
Top