2 thoughts on “A sign of the coming apocalypse”

  1. To me, the gun ownership issue is partly based on the environment you grew up in. I live, and have always lived, the an area between rural and suburban. I grew up with snakes, armadillos, possums, skunks, squirrels, and all sorts of critters just outside my door. Though the area is much more developed now, the gators are not far from me and I want a gun (Preferrably several, with a high caliber) should one try to charge me while I am waiting for animal control. My dad hunted and I ate the venison that he shot. Urban dwellers don’t have these experinces and don’t understand them. Their only experience with guns are those held in the hands of a criminal, holding up a local store or an assault rifle in the hands of a gang-banger. We ALL agree that those folks don’t need to have guns. (They also generally don’t have the guns legally anyway, another important point of discussion.)

    I would say that what we see in the differences between the state-based ACLU groups and the national organization represents these differences. City dwellers truly don’t understand why someone might want or need a gun – any gun. We out here in more rural parts don’t understand their objections and fear of a mere tool of living, rarely used but sometimes the only thing that will get the job done.

    So the debate rages onward…

  2. The ACLU is weirdly organized. They have a national organization, and state organizations which are apparently quite autonomous and independent from the national organization.

    In the news story It is the ACLU of Florida which is supporting the man’s right to his firearms, not the national ACLU. Apparently some other states ACLU groups also recognize the U.S. 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms, including the Nevada ACLU, and I believe the Arizona and Texas ACLU.

    But the national ACLU to this day insists there is no right to guns. The national ACLU continues to cling to a weird (and false) interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in spite of, and in direct opposition to, the most recent ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in the D.C. v Heller case.

    “In striking down Washington D.C.’s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court’s 2008 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. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.

    Although ACLU policy cites the Supreme Court’s decision in U.S. v. Miller as support for our position on the Second Amendment, our policy was never dependent on Miller. Rather, like all ACLU policies, it reflects the ACLU’s own understanding of the Constitution and civil liberties.”


    So the national ACLU is really the ‘anti-civil liberties union’ and deserving of scorn.

Comments are closed.