More like this, please
ACLU petitions court to get man’s guns returned from Broward Sheriff’s Office.
Has the ACLU changed its position in actions and words now? Looks to be:
“Under the Second Amendment, he has a right to have his guns in his house. He’s not a convicted felon,” Butin said. “It is unusual for the ACLU. But the ACLU supports all constitutional rights. We don’t pick and choose.”
Good.
July 16th, 2010 at 9:37 am
Yeah? Try that in Los Angeles, New York, or get the ACLU National collective to take that stand.
July 16th, 2010 at 9:39 am
I’ll take my wins where I can find ’em.
July 16th, 2010 at 9:41 am
the last two sentences of what you quoted does seem to be new for the ACLU, yes. better late than never.
well, that’s assuming this is the national-level ACLU we’re talking about, yes? the article isn’t quite clear. their state-level organizations have varied on the issue for years, some considerably more pro-RKBA than their umbrella organization.
July 16th, 2010 at 9:51 am
NN, before they removed their collective rights mythology as a matter of policy but never took action. Glad to see the action part.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:00 am
From what I’ve read, the NATIONAL ACLU does not support the Second Amendment, and if you read between the lines here, this is not a Second Amendment case. It’s a Fifth Amendment “Takings” case, it just so happens that the property in this one is firearms. I’ve had it pointed out to me that State-level ACLU branches have defended the Second Amendment, but I’ve never seen ACLU President Nadine Strossen reverse her position.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:20 am
“From what I’ve read, the NATIONAL ACLU does not support the Second Amendment”
Some time ago after the Heller case I sent them a letter asking them their position. They told me that regardless of the Heller decision they did not view the Second Amendment as an individual right, and did not recognize the right to bear arms as a civil liberty.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:30 am
It’s odd that the ACLU even needs to be involved – it sounds like the procedure for having his firearms returned in this case is pretty straightforward. It does require a court order, but that should be pretty much automatic if the psych evaluation he underwent didn’t indicate any actual suicidal intent.
There is Due Process here, he just needs to go through it. Why that requires the ACLU is a bit confusing, unless there’s no Legal Aid group or something similar nearby.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:44 am
What Kevin said.
This is nice, but I don’t think it represents a change of heart for the ACLU.
July 16th, 2010 at 11:53 am
The Texas ACLU and the TSRA have been on the same side a couple of times during firearm rights issues. It’s rare but it happens. Our Lobby, Alice Tripp says she will take help whenever it shows up.
July 16th, 2010 at 12:16 pm
“A right to have his guns in his house???”
So do you have a right to free speech, or fee assembly, or illegal search and siezzure,etc only in your house??
The right is the right to keep AND BEAR arms….bear means carry. The right to armed self-defense isn’t a right unless you can exercise it wherever you go, particulary in public.
July 16th, 2010 at 3:24 pm
“We don’t pick and choose.”
Sure they do!
July 16th, 2010 at 10:00 pm
I damn near joined the ACLU after Heller when, i think, the Nevada chapter of the ACLU broke with the mothership and declared they would support the second amendment. Then the mothership had to open their gob and ruin my buzz.
July 17th, 2010 at 1:03 am
If it’s true, it’s about damn time!
July 17th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
While some of the East coast/west coast membership might not be aware (or entirely comfortable with it) the ACLU has and does fully support Second Amendment rights as a natural guarantee under the Constitution. Remember – there’s the Left, the Right, and the Educated.
July 17th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
Who woulda thunk the ACLU would fight to get firearms back and that the NRA would support anti-gun Harry Reid.
Wow.
July 17th, 2010 at 10:33 pm
NAMBLA wants guns?