Although I have been an ACLU member off and on, and admire much of their work, I find your use of the term "dishonesty" much too kind. IMHO "hypocrisy" would be a better word. Unfortunately, IMHO the ACLU is a left-wing advocacy group that only uses the Bill of Rights to support left-wing causes. It is not a true civil liberties organization. The B of R to them is not an end to be protected, but a means to achieve political goals. I do not mean to say that they are the only organization to do this, but their hypocrisy on the Second Amendment sticks out like a sore thumb! Ray Kessler
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Barnett Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 10:01 AM To: [email protected] Subject: ACLU's dishonesty continues http://aclu.org/scotus/2007term/35797prs20080626.html The Right To Bear Arms The Second Amendment has not been the subject of much Supreme Court discussion through the years. To the extent it has been discussed, the Court has described the Second Amendment as designed to protect the ability of the states to preserve their own sovereignty against a new and potentially overreaching national government. Based on that understanding, the Court has historically construed the Second Amendment as a collective right connected to the concept of a "well-regulated militia" rather than an individual right to possess guns for private purposes. In Heller, the Court reinterpreted the Second Amendment as a source of individual rights. Washington D.C.'s gun control law, which bans the private possession of handguns and was widely considered the most restrictive such law in the country, became a victim of that reinterpretation. The Court was careful to note that the right to bear arms is not absolute and can be subject to reasonable regulation. Yet, by concluding that D.C.'s gun control law was unreasonable and thus invalid, the Court placed a constitutional limit on gun control legislation that had not existed prior to its decision in Heller. It is too early to know how much of a constitutional straitjacket the new rule will create. --- end cite The ACLU has always hidden behind this alleged interpretation of the Second Amendment by the Court, even though the Court never actually said it. And in DC v. Heller, the Court even admonishes everyone that mis-interpreted US v. Miller in that manner. Yet, the ACLU claims that the Court has "reinterpreted" the Second Amendment, even though DC v. Heller explicitly addresses previous 2nd Amendment cases one-by-one and explains how they are NOT inconsistent with the individual rights view. I'm disappointed, although I know I should have not expected better. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
