ACLU losing members over its continued refusal to accept USSC gun-ban decision

[Little-Acorn]

I guess if you can't read the normal English that the 2nd amendment is written in, you probably can't read the even-more-normal English the Supreme Court's Heller decision is written in, either. I can't imagine any other reason for the ACLU to keep sticking to their wrong ideas on what the 2nd means.

Sounds like some of their members CAN read, though... and as a result the ACLU's obtuseness is starting to cost them members.

---------------------------------------

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.p...w&pageId=68695

ACLU blasted on own blog over 2nd Amendment stand

Posted: July 03, 2008
11:00 pm Eastern

The American Civil Liberties is getting blasted on its own blog site for holding onto the belief that the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes a collective right for militias to have weapons, even though the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled the right applies to individuals.

"Sorry ACLU you lost me," wrote SuperNaut. "I just took the money I had slated to re-up my lapsed ACLU membership and used it to re-up my NRA membership."

Hundreds of comments have been posted in just the first few days of July, almost uniformly condemning the ACLU's explanation of its position on gun rights, which is that individuals don't have them.

"The ACLU interprets the Second Amendment as a collective right. Therefore, we disagree with the Supreme Court's decision in D.C. v. Heller," the page started. "While the decision is a significant and historic reinterpretation of the right to keep and bear arms, the decision leaves many important questions unanswered that will have to be resolved in future litigation, including what regulations are permissible, and which weapons are embraced by the Second Amendment right that the Court has now recognized."

(Story continues below)

The fine print said, "We intend the comments portion of this blog to be a forum where you can freely express your views on blog postings and on comments made by other people. Given that, please understand that you are responsible for the material you post on the comments portion of this blog. The only postings that we ask that you refrain from posting and that we cannot permit on our website are postings that could cause ACLU to incur legal liability."

Then it specifically asked that comments endorsing or opposing specific political candidates not be posted.

It seems as if posters could hardly wait to punch the "submit" button.

"So pretty much, your policy went from 'we agree with the decision in US v Miller that gun ownership is not a constitutional right' to 'we disagree with DC V Heller and still believe that gun ownership is not a constitutional right,' meaning that despite whatever ruling is laid down, the ACLU will be against the individual right of private gun ownership," said DJ Rick in launching the long list of several hundred comments.

"I was really hoping that the ACLU would at least reconsider its stance, now invalidated by the SCOTUS, and come around to the popularly accepted and now legally accepted view than an amendment in the bill of rights (whether it be the Firs (sic), Second, Third or whichever) actually protects an individual's right," he said.

"Q. How does an ACLU lawyer count to 10? A. 1, 3, 4, 5…," he wrote.

"The ACLU's position was wrong before Heller; to maintain it now is absurd. Not one of the justices in Heller endorsed the 'collective rights' viewpoint. If the ACLU believes that it is the best public policy that individuals should not own guns, it should campaign for the removal of the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution," wrote Posey.

"Does that mean that I can interpret the constitution as not providing for a right to privacy? … Does the ACLU only defend civil liberties it agrees with?" wrote NotSurprised.

[Gaffer]

The aclu's purpose is not to defend peoples rights but to take them away. That's why they won't change their stance. Their goal will now be to remove the second amendment.

[DragonStryk72]

The aclu's purpose is not to defend peoples rights but to take them away. That's why they won't change their stance. Their goal will now be to remove the second amendment.

Well, actually, it was originally to make certain that our rights stayed protected, but, much like the current two parties, it has become mired up to its neck in shit by all the proselytizing its done over recent history.

I think as we begin to move back, and bring back into balance our rights, that the ACLU is either going to have to budge its stance, or it is going to fade into the mist, to be replaced with something better. Either option works just as well in the grand scheme.

[Psychoblues]

The ACLU loses and gains members everyday. There is nothing here to intimate anything unusual except one thing, LA. The monetary coffers and voluntary participation by common Americans in the ACLU has grown exponentially post the theft of the American presidency in 2000.

[Dilloduck]

The ACLU loses and gains members everyday. There is nothing here to intimate anything unusual except one thing, LA. The monetary coffers and voluntary participation by common Americans in the ACLU has grown exponentially post the theft of the American presidency in 2000.

Of course--they're a bunch of liberal assholes. DOH !!

[Yurt]

it actually amazes me how so many people who supported the aclu, now have such disgust for them...good, maybe people will truly see what moral cowards and intellectually bankrupt morons most of them are

[Psychoblues]

ZZZOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!! Shazam!!!!!!!! Right past your ignorant and unconcerned heads!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is every indication that the ACLU is GROWING!!!!!!!!! SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!

Some of you idiots substantially amaze me!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Abbey Marie]

it actually amazes me how so many people who supported the aclu, now have such disgust for them...good, maybe people will truly see what moral cowards and intellectually bankrupt morons most of them are

Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU, was a radical who originally supported Communism. Are we really surpised that the Anti-Christian Liberties Union wants us to forfeit our guns? It is an absolute necessity in any Communist state.

[Dilloduck]

ZZZOOOOMMMM!!!!!!!! Shazam!!!!!!!! Right past your ignorant and unconcerned heads!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is every indication that the ACLU is GROWING!!!!!!!!! SURPRISE!!!!!!!!!!

Some of you idiots substantially amaze me!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tumors grow too.

[Psychoblues]

So, tumor growth is your concern?

Tumors grow too.

How long have you had this condition?

[5stringJeff]

I'm not in the least surprised. I asked an ACLU member a few years ago about the 2nd Amendment. His response was that it's for the militia. I never again considered joining.

[Psychoblues]

The 27 simple words of the 2nd amendment fuck a lot of people up, jeff.

I'm not in the least surprised. I asked an ACLU member a few years ago about the 2nd Amendment. His response was that it's for the militia. I never again considered joining.

You don't have to feel so all alone!!!!!!!!!!

[5stringJeff]

The 27 simple words of the 2nd amendment fuck a lot of people up, jeff.




You don't have to feel so all alone!!!!!!!!!!

I don't feel alone. There's 4 million others just like me!!!

[Psychoblues]

And about half of those 4 million will be voting for Obama in November, jeff.

I don't feel alone. There's 4 million others just like me!!!

Are you still confused?

[actsnoblemartin]

The aclu's purpose is not to defend peoples rights but to take them away. That's why they won't change their stance. Their goal will now be to remove the second amendment.

another reason i believe the reason the aclu is EVIL