TexasCHLforum.com

Dadtodabone wrote:

Scott Farkus wrote:

oohrah wrote:I can't believe what I'm reading! The ACLU exists solely to protect the Bill of Rights (yes, that includes the 2nd Amendment), you know, those amendments that protect the individual from the majority. This is the same group that is defending your right to keep and bear arms.

The "sanctuary city" bill went too far IMO ,because it gives the police near "papers please" powers. This bill will legitimize the profiling of honest citizens.

I support the basic intent of the bill that if you are illegal, you are a criminal, and should be handed over to the Feds, but the state is trying to tell local jurisdictions how to do their jobs.

I'd be interested in seeing a link to a single time the ACLU defended the 2nd Amendment, at least in a way that the members of this forum view it. As I recall, the ACLU doesn't believe that the right to keep and bear applies to inviduals.

The Nevada state level organization. https://www.aclunv.org/en/issues/second-amendment

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

oohrah wrote:I can't believe what I'm reading! The ACLU exists solely to protect the Bill of Rights (yes, that includes the 2nd Amendment), you know, those amendments that protect the individual from the majority. This is the same group that is defending your right to keep and bear arms.

The "sanctuary city" bill went too far IMO ,because it gives the police near "papers please" powers. This bill will legitimize the profiling of honest citizens.

I support the basic intent of the bill that if you are illegal, you are a criminal, and should be handed over to the Feds, but the state is trying to tell local jurisdictions how to do their jobs.

In 37 years of being a legislative advocate for gun owners, I know of only one time when the ACLU supported a Second Amendment issue. That was in 2007 when we passed the Motorist Protection Act (HB1815). The ACLU employee who wrote the supportive article/report was later fired. The national organization diligently avoids taking a pro-Second Amendment position, at least to my recollection. I'd be interested in any information you have to the contrary. The ACLU claims to support all civil and constitutional rights, but that's not true. They pick and choose the rights they want to support and are conspicuously MIA when they disagree with a constitutional right.

The ACLU article/warning is full of false information and outright lies about constitutional rights. People who enter the U.S. in violation of our laws are not "immigrants," they are criminals. The job of law enforcement is to apprehend criminals and any elected official or law enforcement head that refuses to do so is unfit to hold their position. Equating illegal aliens to "immigrants" is an insult and disservice to millions of people who entered the U.S. lawfully, often after waiting for years to do so.

Chas.

Pawpaw wrote:The ACLU's stance on the 2nd Amendment is published here: https://www.aclu.org/other/second-amendment

The heart of it is here:

The ACLU wrote: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. This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008.

In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 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. However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

Yea... They're protecting the Bill of Rights...............................................NOT!!!