But they still fought lots of commendable battles, sticking up for people that nobody else would. I think that's what they've lost... they would be scared to stick up for somebody that might get the wrong people upset with them.
The various police forces during the capital seige - in January, remember how that was this year - said they used less force because the participants were armed and knew they could shoot back
Their whole thing is that they will make the state think twice, whereas the peaceful and unarmed protestors get knocked around with no recourse
Without examples, its easy to think they are advocating for actually killing government officials with their guns in order to get their way, but after a year of examples I can at least say I have experienced competing and conflicting ideas in action
“Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as”
Many people just have a problem with word except on that line and so many other places in society. As such the ACLU’s goal is to push for improvements not simply defend the current situation.
Countries with fewer guns have fewer armed police officers and fewer policemen shootings.
These are separate issues. All Americans experience a collective punishment from law enforcement because they might have "a" gun on them.
I think this is mostly inaccurate? The Jan 6 protestors/rioters mostly left their guns at home due to fear of D.C.‘s strict gun laws. Even the oathkeepers planned to keep their guns in Virginia and ferry them over by boat only once “called up as militia”.
The Capitol police are used to dealing with protestors and demonstrators and have never opened fire on a crowd with live ammo before. The one time it did look like a rioter (Ashlii Babbit) was going to get too close to members of Congress they used their firearm without hesitation.
If I find the quotes again from officer(s) interviews I’ll link you
Americans have guns
Right wingers showed up with them and then said it was left wingers, who do also own them
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."
If individuals aren't allowed to own and practice with weapons normally, then when it's needed the Militia will not be "well-regulated", as in well-armed or trained.
The 2nd amendment is really very important to all civil liberties, since otherwise there is nothing to stop a repressive government from taking control.
" Sect. XXI. That the right of the citizens to bear arms, in defence of themselves and the state, shall not be questioned. "
The NRA does plenty of activism that doesn't involve defending people against charges, but for this incident they've been silent. For comparison, here is a statement that was put out by Gun Owners of America: https://www.gunowners.org/goa-speaks-out-after-no-knock-raid... . IMO it doesn't go far enough, condemning the general practice but failing to condemn the specific murderers, but at least they've said something.
However, I do not believe a pro gun group should work to get rid of no knock raids. I think a more generalized civil liberty group should work on that. I am very much in favor of NRA working on 2nd amendment cases (and those related like 4th amendment cases where they are taking a person's gun). I am not sure what other activism you are talking about, but if it is not about guns I don't think the NRA should work on it.
If Kenneth Walker (Taylor's boyfriend) had been murdered instead, would this not include demanding justice for him? Or if by "defend" you mean only against legal charges, why should the home defender have to win the armed conflict in order to receive support?
> I do not believe a pro gun group should work to get rid of no knock raids
No knock raids are logically incompatible with private ownership of firearms, and the right to self defense in general. They directly follow from assuming a compliant disarmed populace that will suffer attackers until the "authorities" arrive, which is precisely what gun advocates reject. As such, fighting no knock raids is firmly within the scope of gun activism.
> While the department had received court approval for a “no-knock” entry, the orders were changed before the raid to “knock and announce,” meaning that the police had to identify themselves.
> The officers have said they did announce themselves, but Mr. Walker said he did not hear anything.
Amazing how in 2021, with an abundant of factually checked information available, some HN commenters can use the internet to write a comment, but cannot use the internet to fact check their assertions before posting.