I stopped by the MLK Jr. library in San Jose this afternoon and saw an ACLU booth so I decided to stop by. The guy sitting there was nice, in a sort of condescending manner. He gave me a little card with advice regarding LEO interactions. When I asked him what the local chapter's stance on the Second Amendment was, he said, (all quotes paraphrased) "I think we're very much in support of it." Alright! Then two shaggy guys walked by and he interrupted himself to holler at them. "Woah, you guys need these (police advice cards in hand)! I can tell just by looking at you" blah blah blah, I was brushed off.
Then his helper arrived, an attorney, I'm guessing. So I asked her the same question, and she sort of stiffened and asked "in what regard?" Well, in general. Would they take a 2A case? What is their official stance, and how would McDonald influence that? "Well, we do support and believe in the Second, but we feel the "well regulated militia" is the operative phrase. We don't base our stance on agreeing with what the Supreme Court says, necessarily. We'll agree that what they say is the law, but we hold our own viewpoints."
When I asked if, assuming incorporation post McDonald, the ACLU would take on more 2A cases, such as California's assault weapons ban, CCW, etc I got a sort of non-response. She said they all love sitting around and debating issues, but it takes an actionable case and they're more likely to take gun-related cases for their 4A merits, mostly. She then recommended I look up the chapter's website and blah blah blah for more information.
So I was a bit disappointed. Not surprised at all, mind you, just disappointed. It's not really fair to expect a surprise and be disappointed when you don't get one, but this is fairly new territory for them. Hopefully they'll come around. In the meantime, I'll steer my donations to CGF and NRA.
Then his helper arrived, an attorney, I'm guessing. So I asked her the same question, and she sort of stiffened and asked "in what regard?" Well, in general. Would they take a 2A case? What is their official stance, and how would McDonald influence that? "Well, we do support and believe in the Second, but we feel the "well regulated militia" is the operative phrase. We don't base our stance on agreeing with what the Supreme Court says, necessarily. We'll agree that what they say is the law, but we hold our own viewpoints."
When I asked if, assuming incorporation post McDonald, the ACLU would take on more 2A cases, such as California's assault weapons ban, CCW, etc I got a sort of non-response. She said they all love sitting around and debating issues, but it takes an actionable case and they're more likely to take gun-related cases for their 4A merits, mostly. She then recommended I look up the chapter's website and blah blah blah for more information.
So I was a bit disappointed. Not surprised at all, mind you, just disappointed. It's not really fair to expect a surprise and be disappointed when you don't get one, but this is fairly new territory for them. Hopefully they'll come around. In the meantime, I'll steer my donations to CGF and NRA.
Comment