| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Land of the Free |
| 2nd Amendment Sanctuaries Are Acts Of Faithlessness In Government |
| 2020-01-22 |
| Immigration sanctuaries are just fine, because it's too expensive to obey the law in that case. Seriously, that's an argument that they make in the editorial. [LATimes] Nearly two years ago, the governing board of Effingham County, Ill., passed a resolution declaring itself a “sanctuary county” and barring “employees from enforcing the unconstitutional actions of the state government.” Those actions? Gun control laws, which are resoundingly unpopular in the rural county some 215 miles south of Chicago. Since then, more than 400 other local jurisdictions in 20 states (including the city of Needles here in California) have adopted similar resolutions, some with more bite than others, but all in defiance of the law. The simple fact is: Local governments cannot decide willy-nilly that if they don’t like a state law, they don’t have to enforce it. While states may have powers unique from the federal government’s, no such duality exists at the municipal level. Cities have only the powers granted to them by their states. The 2nd Amendment sanctuary movement adopted its name as an obvious play on the immigration sanctuary movement. But those movements are related in name only, and it is possible to support the latter without supporting the former. Immigration codes, after all, are part of federal civil law, not criminal law, and local jurisdictions have the right to decide that they don’t want to use local tax dollars to enforce federal civil codes. They may not impede the federal government’s ability to enforce its immigration codes, but they don’t have to cooperate. Don't know how up to date the following info is, but here's a link to their editorial board bios. Pretty much what you'd expect. |
| Posted by:charger |
| #9 2nd A sanctuaries are also a statement about the rule of law, faith in the Constitution and a willingness to uphold it. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2020-01-22 12:56 |
| #8 They need stern reminding they are public servants. Contrast that stooge Northam's behavior with Trumps address at Davos. |
| Posted by: Cesare 2020-01-22 08:58 |
| #7 The editorial board seems to have missed a lot of schooling - But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. |
| Posted by: Procopius2K 2020-01-22 08:00 |
| #6 Second amendment sanctuaries *are* a sign of lack of faith in government. The Los Angeles Times - accidentally right! |
| Posted by: Raj 2020-01-22 07:58 |
| #5 Editorial board BIOS needs flashed... |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2020-01-22 05:21 |
| #4 It all comes down to the consent of the governed. That can be withdrawn at any time. |
| Posted by: M. Murcek 2020-01-22 05:20 |
| #3 Second amendment sanctuaries *are* a sign of lack of faith in government. There is precedent for this: WHEN in the Course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation. |
| Posted by: SteveS 2020-01-22 01:14 |
| #2 Actually, it's (IMO) citizens' response to faithless government. |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru PB 2020-01-22 01:03 |
| #1 "I have rights. You have obligations!"? |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru PB 2020-01-22 01:00 |