Samantha Atkins wrote:
> Geraint Rees wrote:
> > On 12/24/01 4:24 PM, "Mike Lorrey" <email@example.com> wrote:
> > > However, it is a proven fact that for every 1% increase in the law
> > > abiding population carrying concealed weapons, violent crime rates drop
> > > by 2%.
> > I'd be interested to read about this 'proven fact' - do you have a
> > reference? Presumably your 'proven fact' only applies specifically to US
> > society where it is legal to own a handgun (unlike the UK, where it is not -
> > any more).
> PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE GUN TROLLS!
> That said, I assume Mike's linking of ACLU with 2nd Amendment
> issues in a negative way is due to the ACLU being neutral on the
> issue due to their (I believe quite errorneous) state militia
> (collectivist) interpretation of what the 2nd amendment is
> about. But this rather common error does not in any wise
> justify a claim that the ACLU is a bunch of "terrorists" or out
> to destroy civil rights. Such an allegation is inflammatory
The ACLU is far more than neutral. They have filed numerous amicus curae
briefs with the courts against the individual rights interpretation, and
they are also involved in the Trauma Project, an alliance of the AMA,
APA, the ABA, and the ACLU along with Handgun Control Inc (now styling
itself as "The Brady Project") and Andrew McKelvey's (of monster.com
fame) Americans for Gun Safety in a Orwellian project to assemble a
private nationwide database of gun ownership by violating the medical
privacy rights of private citizens. If your doctor is aware of, or has
asked you, your spouse, or your children if there are firearms in your
household, in the past three years, then you are now on this database.
Despite this sort of invasiveness being a 'boundary issue' ethical
violation of doctor-patient confidentiality, millions of family doctors
and emergency room staffers are engaging in this illegal campaign to
identify all gun owners in the US. Furthermore, they are advising family
members of gun owners of the alleged 'risks' of gun ownership (despite
the total lack of training by such practitioners in risk assessment or
risk management, a lack of certification in the same, and a lack of
liability insurance for the same). If, for instance, your wife is told
by her OB-GYN that your self defense pistol should be kept unloaded and
locked up in a safe at all times, they are placing themselves in a
position of liability if your lack of ability to access your firearm for
self defense results in injury, death, or other financial losses.
The ACLU will, though, happily defend your doctor against your civil
suit in the event you take him/her to court, claiming that the doctor
has a first amendment right to disseminate the lies and propaganda of
the anti-gun movement, that whether the doctor is wrong or not is
immaterial to the doctors intent to help protect the patient from harm
(an argument that carries no water in malpractice case law, but would
play in front of a jury).
The ACLU is as much a terrorist organization as the al Barakhat money
wiring organization in Somalia is. They may not get their own hands
bloody, but they enable the deaths of thousands.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat May 11 2002 - 17:44:31 MDT