I did not see this posted anywhere else and wanted to share the ACLU's take on universal background checks. It appears that they also fear the creation of a government database of law-abiding citizens.

 

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/04/aclu-to-reid-not-so-fast-on-that-gun-control-bill/

Well that's good to hear. AFAIK, the ACLU has been pretty voiceless on gun rights, right?

aclu sucks and only picks certain causes. when older dems and liberals have left the organization in droves over the past few decades, you know it's a problem

Saw a report on Fox News about that. The ACLU is finally waking up. Their concerns about Universal Background Checks can't hurt........but I still don't trust them though!

The ACLU has their own agenda and I wouldn't be surprised if elimination of gun rights is faiirly high up on their list, unfortunately things like universal background checks happens to interfere with their overall strategy.

I sent NJ ACLU inviting them to oppose the NJ bill using terrorist watchlist.

 

It should not be difficult since national ACLU opposes terrorist watch list on due process and other concerns.

 

This week I got a nice form letter in the mail saying they won't be taking up the issue because they have limited resources and higher priorities.

Wolf in sheep's clothing. The ACLU isn't really a friend of ours. They believe that the 2A is a collective right, not an individual one, meaning that it is about the militia, not the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Wolf in sheep's clothing. The ACLU isn't really a friend of ours. They believe that the 2A is a collective right, not an individual one, meaning that it is about the militia, not the individual right to keep and bear arms.

 

That is the official position of national ACLU, and position of every state chapter, save Nevada.

 

Regardless of differences on 2A, there are fifth amendment and fourteenth amendment interests involved by the terrorist watchlist.

Wolf in sheep's clothing. The ACLU isn't really a friend of ours. They believe that the 2A is a collective right, not an individual one, meaning that it is about the militia, not the individual right to keep and bear arms.

 

The ACLU can try to take that position. The problem is that in order to disarm people, the government WILL have to violate rights they care about. It's inevitable. Most of the original bill of rights covers things a governemtn should not bother attempting because all it leads to is offing your citizenry in order to make them behave. Governments like that don't last long.

I don't know the politics of the ACLU and obviously many don't trust their intentions. Still, it could be "the enemy of my enemy.."-thing, for now.

 

If you read the entire DC interview:

http://dailycaller.com/2013/04/04/exclusive-aclu-says-reids-gun-legislation-could-threaten-privacy-rights-civil-liberties/3/

 

They are concerned about many of the same things we are with these bills..

1) The definition of what records are kept, for how long, and who has access are not defined and open for abuse

2) The term "transfer" is vaguely defined and could jam up folks who are trying to follow the laws.

3) The 'tip line' is a bad idea and ripe for abuse and will jam up students (or parents!).