The plain language of the Second Amendment in no way, shape, or form, can be construed, I think, as giving an absolute right to unregulated gun ownership. It says, "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to bear arms shall not be infringed." Certainly, when you have the notion of "well-regulated" right in the constitutional language itself, it seems to defy any argument that regulation is inconsistent with the amendment.Something mentioned in the Constitution? It's the second item in the BILL OF RIGHTS, Nadine!
Putting all that aside, I don't want to dwell on constitutional analysis, because our view has never been that civil liberties are necessarily coextensive with constitutional rights. Conversely, I guess the fact that something is mentioned in the Constitution doesn't necessarily mean that it is a fundamental civil liberty.
And she's still President.
But now there's been a break. Via Dave Hardy we learn:
Everyone loves guns in Nevada. Ducks Unlimited, the National Rifle Association, Republicans, the American Civil Liberties Union, the ...Said Supreme Court ruling coming in June of 2008.
Wait. The ACLU?
The Nevada ACLU has declared its support for an individual’s right to bear arms, apparently making it the first state affiliate in the nation to buck the national organization’s position on the Second Amendment.
The state board of directors reached the decision this month after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the rights of individuals to own handguns.
New to me (and apparently Dave), but old nonetheless.
Kudos, ladies and gentlemen, for your swift action. Too bad your move apparently wasn't followed by any of your sister organizations.
"The Nevada ACLU respects the individual's right to bear arms subject to constitutionally permissible regulations," a statement on the organization’s Web site said. "The ACLU of Nevada will defend this right as it defends other constitutional rights."Will it also defend the right to keep? And does this mean the ACLU will be filing suit against North Las Vegas soon? (Apparently not.)
"This was the consensus," said Allen Lichtenstein, general counsel for ACLU of Nevada. "There really wasn't a lot of dissent."One more reason for Sarah and Kristin and Josh and Paul to be Sad Pandas. (Can we rub their noses in it?)
But the state affiliate's position puts it at odds with the national organization.I'll say.
There's more to the story, but it's interesting to see a split in that organization over this topic
We're (still!) winning.