ACLU Joins Fight to Stop Illegal Searches of Open Gun Carriers

[virginia mountainman]

Apparently Loveland Police Chief Luke (“Check Point”) Hecker slept through those classes at the police academy about the Fourth Amendment – you know, that funny little footnote on constitutional privacy which the Supreme Court has said means the police cannot constitutionally:


Detain people just because they are carrying a gun (Florida v. J.L.)
Demand identification from people walking about town (Kolender v. Lawson)
Seize citizens’ personal property in order to view serial numbers (Arizona v. Hicks)

“What’s next in Loveland?,” asks John Pierce, co-founder of OpenCarry.org, “will the police start seizing cell phones to check sim cards?”

http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-aclu-joins-fight-to-stop-illegal-searches-of-open-carriers

[imdjh]

1. Interesting comment

I retract my former statements......about the ACLU. I would never have expected they would get involved in a case like this. I'm also surprised at how many police chiefs are hostile toward lawful gun owners these days. It's pretty sickening that they are sworn to uphold the law , and while people are out committing real crimes, they're busy harassing a law -abiding 71 year old man.

I guess they have no more respect for their elders than they do for the law in Loveland. I'll definitely be sure to steer clear of that corrupt town next time I'm in Colorado. And unless you just enjoy being harassed by government sanctioned punks with guns , you might want to do the same. - LagerHead July 21, 2009 2:21PM


The right wingers are fed so much bullshit about the ACLU by the right wing nuts, they often have no idea how many times the ACLU has gone to bat for a position that a self-identified conservative or religious person might hold.

[bluestateguy]

2. Such policies are an open invitation to racial profiling

Such as searching and frisking the black gun owners, but leaving the white gun owners alone. I could see it happening.

[iverglas]

7. watch out!!!11!1!

http://www.fstdt.com/winace/pics/index.htm#slippery_slope
"Ever have an argument where the opposition kept bringing up extremely unlikely but horrific consequences that they say will logically follow from accepting your position? 'If we legalize marijuana, soon we'll have preschoolers shooting heroin' is a good example."

[TheWraith]

10. You think that that's really unlikely?

Here in New York we've got a list of horror stories the lenth of my arm that I could tell you: either about police using any excuse to harass black people, or about corruption and fraud within the pistol permit system.

[iverglas]

14. perhaps not

Is someone lobbying to repeal laws against breaking and entering because sometimes members of vulnerable minorities are wrongfully stopped and questioned while walking around at night?

If the problem is racial profiling, fix the problem. Don't attempt moronic arguments about laws and policies based on how they might be abused.

[SteveM]

13. Please, acquaint yourself with Jim Crow South, esp. re: RKBA (nt)

[iverglas]

15. please, say something worth reading

[SteveM]

20. Read much? (Heard that one, too.) You need to acquaint yourself...

with Mr. Crow -- the font of your gun-control feelings/positions/lifestyle, etc. Don't be embarrassed, a lot of people don't realize it when they take a nominal "progressive" position, only to discover some crud bags had the same outlook years before.

[iverglas]

21. you need to acquaint yourself with Mr. Mahoney

One of the fonts of the right-wing, racist gun militant agenda you seem so enamoured of.

[iverglas]

22. oh, by the way

The day when anything I espouse derives from anything done in the US of A is the day I will shoot myself.

Sorry if you didn't understand that.

Your laws never applied where I live, you know?

Nor did your social policies, or anything else you might have to offer.

[SteveM]

23. Ha! Still don't understand.

But you might understand your own crappolla better if you read up on the history of Jim Crow so you can better understand the finer points of gun control/bans. BTW, the bans against blacks owning guns in the South was rather porous; even the white racist gun-banners knew this, and the incidence of true "race riots" declined accordingly. The last one was in Jacksonville, Fla in 1960.

You really need to keep up with this.

[iverglas]

24. let me talk slowly

Firearms control measures are in place all over the face of the planet.

Your own particular nasty bits of history - the forms of institutionalized slavery and institutionalized racial discrimination found in it - are not found in any comparable places on the planet.

Firearms control measures in those other places have, and have always had, precisely fuck all to do with anything that ever happened in the USofA ... other than a firm desire never to experience the firearms violence that has prevailed there for some time now.

Oh look: the implementation of firearms control measures in a society is not dependent on a previous history of slavery/racism in that society, let the fuck alone slavery/racism in some foreign country.

Late 20th century and present-day firearms control measures in the USofA have exactly as much to do with that history. Nothing.

That late 20th century and present-day firearms control proposals made and supported in the USofA by people who are not racists, and in fact, overwhelmingly, by people who are themselves the victims of racism, would be driven by racism, is something that only someone desperately shoving an agenda could even consider saying out loud.

It is ludicrous on its face, and it is nothing but demagoguery -- nothing but an unsupported and false accusation of racism made to divert public attention from reality.

On the other hand, the late 20th century and present-day "gun rights" movement in the USofA originated with, and is still driven by, right-wing white racists. Your ignorance of this fact is ... well, it would be sad, if it were real.

One of the impetuses for some of the tightening of firearms control measures in Canada in the last decade and a half or so was violence against women, and specifically the mass murder of women at a postsecondary school by a misogynist in legal possession of a firearm. Just ask some of your colleagues in Canada (we have right-wing gun militants here too, you know). Or ask them how Jim Crow affected firearms control where they're at.

One of the impetuses for some of the tightening of firearms control measures in the UK in the last decade and a half or so was the mass murder of children committed by someone in legal possession of a firearm. Again, just ask some of your colleagues in the UK. And ask them how Jim Crow affected firearms control where they're at.

The impetuses for tightening firearms control measures in the USofA are exactly the same things: concerns about public safety and the safety of individuals, particularly vulnerable individuals, as well as concerns about the contribution easy access to firearms makes to the spread of organized crime and the harms that result, etc.

Once upon a time, it was not unreasonable for someone genuinely concerned about women's interests to maintain that abortion should be illegal, because it was a dangerous and often fatal procedure. Anyone who argues that it is in women's interests for abortion to be illegal today is a misogynist. Things change. They really do.

Once upon a time, white racists may have considered firearms control to be in their interests. Today, they are well aware that this is no longer the case, and that the right wing's best chance of remaking their society in their own interests is to attack and undermine the institutions and values of that society on as many fronts as possible. Undermining public confidence in those institutions by constant public fretting about the need for "self-defence" and thus for a pistol in every pocket is one seemingly minor but in fact very integral part of that project.

You know it, I know it, we all know it. And we also know exactly how concerned about the interests of people of colour all the hand-wringers are.


Slow enough for you?


typo fixed.

[X_Digger]

3. k&r!

Nice to see the ACLU on the correct side of this issue. If they keep this up, I might have to cancel my NRA membership :)

[proteus_lives]

4. GO ACLU!

:thumbsup:

[aikoaiko]

5. Fuggin A.

If the ACLU keeps creeping toward protecting the other civil rights of gun owners, they'll soon have to better protect the 2nd Amendment.


:)

[AtheistCrusader]

8. Some local chapters of the ACLU do.

Even if the national arm disagrees with Heller vs DC.

[frebrd]

19. "they'll soon have to better protect the 2nd Amendment"

When that happens, I may reinstate my membership.

[iverglas]

6. fyi, John Pierce

“What’s next in Loveland?,” asks John Pierce, co-founder of OpenCarry.org, “will the police start seizing cell phones to check sim cards?”

I'm just a foreigner, but I'm not aware of any circumstances in which an individual might be disqualified from carrying a cell phone. Maybe things are worse down there than I have imagined.


Ah, the ACLU. Demonstrating again why I have never been a liberal.

[AtheistCrusader]

9. The the appropriate analogy would be to check ID, not the serial number of the weapon.

In John's correct analogy, it would be to see if the phone was stolen, which does happen quite a bit.

[TheWraith]

11. If you're not a liberal, and you're not a Democrat, what the hell are you doing here? nt

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

12. Probably the same thing she's doing when

commenting on American policies.

:shrug:

[iverglas]

17. which would be?

C'mon; you obviously have a theory.

Otherwise, your post would just be meaningless noise, eh?



typo fixed

[iverglas]

16. same thing as a whole lot of other non-liberals and non-Democrats are, I guess

Standing up for what's rational and decent. Eh?

You have noticed, I'm sure, that there's another word in that collection: "progressive".

That's a word that actually had a meaning back when the world was young, and I was a progressive. I still am. Also a social democrat, i.e. as socialist as circumstances permit.

Is that okay with you, now?

[iverglas]

18. love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

No, not me. You, I wouldn't know.


Artist: Ochs Phil
Song: Love Me, I'm a Liberal
Album: There But for Fortune

I cried when they shot Medgar Evers
Tears ran down my spine
I cried when they shot Mr. Kennedy
As though I'd lost a father of mine
But Malcolm X got what was coming
He got what he asked for this time
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

I go to civil rights rallies
And I put down the old D.A.R.
I love Harry and Sidney and Sammy
I hope every colored boy becomes a star
But don't talk about revolution
That's going a little bit too far
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

I cheered when Humphrey was chosen
My faith in the system restored
I'm glad the commies were thrown out
of the A.F.L. C.I.O. board
I love Puerto Ricans and Negros
as long as they don't move next door
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

The people of old Mississippi
Should all hang their heads in shame
I can't understand how their minds work
What's the matter don't they watch Les Crane?
But if you ask me to bus my children
I hope the cops take down your name
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

I read New Republic and Nation
I've learned to take every view
You know, I've memorized Lerner and Golden
I feel like I'm almost a Jew
But when it comes to times like Korea
There's no one more red, white and blue
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

I vote for the Democratic Party
They want the U.N. to be strong
I go to all the Pete Seeger concerts
He sure gets me singing those songs
I'll send all the money you ask for
But don't ask me to come on along
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal

Once I was young and impulsive
I wore every conceivable pin
Even went to the socialist meetings
Learned all the old union hymns
But I've grown older and wiser
And that's why I'm turning you in
So love me, love me, love me, I'm a liberal



Same song, different year.

RIP, Phil.