Nevada ACLU Supports Heller and 2nd Amendment!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Buck Nekkid

Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2005
Messages
392
Location
Deep in The Heart of Texas
Unbelievable! In today's Las Vegas Sun:

CARSON CITY — Everyone loves guns in Nevada. Ducks Unlimited, the National Rifle Association, Republicans, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ...

Wait. The ACLU?

The Nevada ACLU has declared its support for an individual’s right to bear arms, apparently making it the first state affiliate in the nation to buck the national organization’s position on the Second Amendment.

The state board of directors reached the decision this month after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals to own handguns.

“The Nevada ACLU respects the individual’s right to bear arms subject to constitutionally permissible regulations,” a statement on the organization’s Web site said. “The ACLU of Nevada will defend this right as it defends other constitutional rights.”

“This was the consensus,” said Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel for ACLU of Nevada. “There really wasn’t a lot of dissent.”

But the state affiliate’s position puts it at odds with the national organization.

The New York City-based ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court ruling, saying in a statement that it interprets the Second Amendment as a collective right to own guns and not an individual one.

“In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue,” according to the position on its Web page.

It’s that position that has long infuriated gun rights advocates.

Larry Rhodes, president of the Stillwater Firearms Association, a Northern Nevada advocacy group, said the state ACLU’s position “is a wonderful thing.”

“I’m thrilled the Nevada ACLU, which seems to support the other nine Bill of Rights, has decided to do this,” Rhodes said.

John Cahill, chairman of the Nevada Outdoor Democrats, said he had not been a member of the ACLU because of its position.

“I resented their position on the Second Amendment,” Cahill said. “I’d be happy to be a card-carrying member of the Nevada ACLU.”

The phrase “card-carrying member of the ACLU” has long been used by conservatives as a liberal curse, perhaps most famously against Democratic presidential candidate Michael Dukakis.

Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, said the decision was not political, nor a slap at the national organization. He said the ACLU of Nevada often defends both conservative and liberal groups when, in its view, a constitutional right is being violated.

“This was a legal, constitutional decision for us,” he said. “Right now, it’s an issue percolating in the ACLU universe. It should be no surprise that an issue that has sparked a lot of issues and debate outside the ACLU has sparked debate inside the ACLU.”

The national ACLU, in a statement by a spokeswoman, said, “ACLU affiliates are free to take positions that differ from those of the national office.”

The spokeswoman said she was unaware of any other ACLU affiliate that had taken a differing position on the Second Amendment.

Peck said the state has a history of opposing government involvement in people’s lives.

“Nevada has a long, proud tradition of libertarian skepticism of government overreach,” Peck said. “An individual’s right to bear arms, not surprisingly, is in the Nevada constitution.”

Even when gun control was a major national issue during the 1990s, Nevada’s strong gun culture knew no party lines.

State Sen. John Lee, a North Las Vegas Democrat, has sponsored a number of bills on people’s right to carry guns.

He pointed to the gun park being built north of Las Vegas, the first phase of which will cost $64 million.

“We’re a hunting state,” Lee said. “Here in Nevada, we’re a real pragmatic group of Democrats.” (Democratic state Sen. Dina Titus, during her run for governor in 2006, liked to point out that she owned a gun.)

Attempts to find a Nevada group or affiliate in favor of stricter gun control were unsuccessful.

Bob Fulkerson, the executive director of the Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada, said he did not know of any such organizations in the state.

The gun control issue “has never really come up,” he said. “It’s ironic because we are one of the leaders in handgun-related deaths.”

Ladd Everitt, spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said he recognizes different parts of cultures have different experiences with guns.

“Certain areas of the country have very strong traditions and take great pride in them,” he said. “I think the real shame is we could have better firearm laws without preventing law-abiding citizens from owning guns.”

Peck said he anticipates Nevadans will come to his group to protect their gun rights.

“I have no doubt people will be making inquiries on their rights,” he said. “I have no doubt we’ll be stepping to the plate on Second Amendment rights, if they come under assault by governments. In this state, of course, I don’t see any big rush by lawmakers.”



Also see comments at Section 11
 
This just in from our weather reporter Beelzebub....temperatures have dropped and heavy snowfall is expected soon.
 
Cut and paste the link from hso. There is a poll you can take as to whether the SC was right or wrong about Heller.
 
You suppose NV ACLU could open a branch here in Colorado?

The CONVACLU?

I have a feeling we're going to need one here.
 
The big pigs will fly when all the liberal leftists agree to the same thing...

Some of the big pigs already have flown the coop. It took a while, but even Harvard's liberal lion of constitutional law, Larry Tribe, eventually (and prior to the decision in Heller) came around to realize the second amendment is an individual right, not a collective one. It may take a while, but I think other chapters of the ACLU may eventually come around also.
 
I thought...

the ACLU of Nevada often defends both conservative and liberal groups when, in its view, a constitutional right is being violated.
that that was the whole reason-for-being of the entire ACLU!

It's the American CIVIL LIBERTIES Union. A "right" is meaningless unless those whose positions you dislike are also free to exercise it.
 
This reminds me of recent actions of a couple little suburbs around a large Midwestern city. Anyone for dominoes?
 
We need the other rural state ACLU chapters to jump on this is quickly as possible and work to change the National ACLU's opinion on this issue.
 
Between yes and Heck yes we hold a 93% majority.

Is the national ACLU in DC because that would explain alot?
 
Texas ACLU has for several years.

Does that challenge anyone's stereotypes? :)

ACLU OF TEXAS AND GUN RIGHTS: I think it's too bad that the ACLU takes a collective rights view of the Second Amendment, and generally doesn't do much to defend state constitutional rights to bear arms. (As readers of this blog might realize, I don't think they're evil or even hypocritical for disagreeing with my interpretation of the Second Amendment, or even for declining to defend the clearly individual state constitutional rights. They're entitled to pick and choose what rights they think are most important to defend, just as the NRA and my two favorite conservative/libertarian public interest law firms, the Institute for Justice and the Center for Individual Rights, are entitled to do the same. I just think the ACLU is mistaken in its views.)
In any case, though, I'm pleased that the ACLU of Texas is taking a pro-right-to-self-defense view; Scott Henson, director of the police accountability project for the ACLU of Texas, testified this Spring -- on the ACLU of Texas's behalf -- in favor of a proposal to let law-abiding citizens carry guns in their cars. The law ultimately passed, and Mr. Henson is now trying to check how well it's being implemented, by filing state open records act requests for any instructions that government agencies are giving police officers about the new law. Sounds like good work to me.

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2006_01_15-2006_01_21.shtml#1137534663

Mike
 
This is not a surprising turn of events

The State ACLU affiliates generally use both US and state constitutional provisions for it's lawsuits and legal work. I'm personally working on Washington State's ACLU affiliate on this situation. Expect this to happen more and more often.

ACLU national is based on New York City, not DC. The real issue is this: The ACLU as an organization has a charter which require any policy changes be approved by a board of directors. Also remember that ACLU's basis for the whole "collective rights" comes from the lower court cases misquoting and misinterpreting Miller.

http://www.guncite.com/journals/dencite.html

I'm certainly not defending ACLU on this particular decision. Keep hammering them on their comment board, but "you're dirty commies" comments are not helpful, considering Roger Baldwin rejected communism in the 1940's and purged the ACLU organization of their membership and influence (which most of the comments seems to indicate them as a "communist" organization continuously). If the ACLU can be turned into our side on this subject, it'll drive a stake through the heart of the now dying vampire called "Gun Control". The blog post comments HAVE gotten their attention, and it's being reviewed, and they've been given the tools and the scholarship. Helps that their president is a Constitutional Law Professor. :)

-Lonnie
 
Not really. ACLU of Texas has had this position for as long as I can remember. 2 down, 48 to go. :)

This is the beginning of a grassroots rebellion among the state ACLU's. This along with the review should help.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top