ACLU position on second amendment

[jimmy the one]

Gun Control Updated: 1/17/2013 ACLU POSITION Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right.
..... For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that {collective militia} view. This position is currently under review and is being updated by the ACLU National Board in light of Supreme Court decision in D.C. v. Heller in 2008.
In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 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.
However, particular federal or state laws on licensing, registration, prohibition, or other regulation of the manufacture, shipment, sale, purchase or possession of guns may raise civil liberties questions.

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.
Heller takes a different approach than the ACLU has advocated. At the same time, it leaves many unresolved questions, including what firearms are protected by the Second Amendment, what regulations (short of an outright ban) may be upheld, and how that determination will be made. https://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment

I guess they didn't: July 22, 2010, An ACLU insider with a state affiliate told me the national organization is in the middle of “rethinking” their position on second amendment rights. http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/watercooler/2010/jul/22/aclu-rethinking-second-amendment/#ixzz3U5Hbzwrw

current wiki 2015: Gun rights – The national ACLU's position is that the Second Amendment protects a collective right to own guns, rather than an individual right (some state affiliates consider the Second Amendment to refer to individual gun rights). The national organization's position is based on the phrases "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State". However, the ACLU opposes any effort to create a registry of gun owners and has worked with NRA to prevent a registry from being created and has favored protecting the right to carry guns under the 4th Amendmen

[Romeo.lima333]

1. tne 2a applies only if militias are required well they are gone and with them went any 2a "rights"

you and your drinking buddies calling yourselves a militia doesnt count

[jimmy the one]

3. romeo & juliet the one

romeo: {the} 2a applies only if militias are required {,} well they are gone and with them went any 2a "rights"

Couldn't agree with you more, romeo, appears we are on the same side of this issue, whether you realize it or not.

.. you and your drinking buddies calling yourselves a militia doesnt count

I drink alone, cause I wanna... er, I don't have any drinking buddies; & I'm not in any way calling 'bob's militias' down the street, a 'well regulated' one.

[Romeo.lima333]

4. oops im sorry i wasnt directing this at you i was just sayin to all in general

[jimmy the one]

2. Blanks firing blanks

Observe, Blanks, firing blanks:

The Hypocrisy of the ACLU by Jeremy D. Blanks
... The ACLU is well known for its court, political, and media battles in support of 1st, 4th, 5th, 10th, etc. amendment rights... However, I have become concerned about the ACLU, which has decided that the 2nd Amendment is not worthy of their support as are the other individual rights specifically listed in the Bill of Rights.

The ACLU takes this odd position on the 2nd Amendment for two primary reasons, along with a fall back stance. First, they have decided that the term "the people" that is contained in the 2nd Amendment does not apply to "the people" as it does in all of the other rights contained in the Bill of Rights. Instead, they take the position that this is a collective right and can only be assigned to a militia group, such as the National Guard, which means that Congress can limit or remove gun ownership as they see fit.
Secondly, they cite the 1939 Supreme Court case of US. vs. Miller, as proof that the Supreme Court agrees with their beliefs.
And finally, they take the fall back position that even if their first two reasons do not hold water, the 2nd is now outdated because the founding fathers could not have envisioned the type of arms that are currently available and the dangers of a few using firearms in criminal activity outweigh the value of this right to society.. http://www.keepandbeararms.com/newsarchives/XcNewsPlus.asp?cmd=view&articleid=307

You've convinced a lot of us that 2ndA protects a militia centric rkba, jeremy blanks, by explaining the ACLU position quite succinctly & accurately.