• Sheriffs are forming "2nd Amendment sanctuaries" refusing to enforce gun control
    285 replies, posted
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-guns-sanctuary/defiant-us-sheriffs-push-gun-sanctuaries-imitating-liberals-on-immigration-idUSKCN1QL0ZC (Reuters) - A rapidly growing number of counties in at least four states are declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, refusing to enforce gun-control laws that they consider to be infringements on the U.S. constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Organizers of the pro-gun sanctuaries admit they took the idea from liberals who have created immigration sanctuaries across the United States where local officials defy the Trump administration’s efforts to enforce tougher immigration laws. Democrats took control of state governments or widened leads in legislative chambers last November, then followed through on promises to enact gun control in response to an epidemic of mass shootings in public spaces, religious sites and schools. Twenty-five of New Mexico’s 33 counties have passed resolutions to support sheriffs who refuse to enforce any firearms laws that they consider unconstitutional, according to the New Mexico Sheriffs Association.
Makes sense, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, however some states and cities pass unconstitutional laws knowing that the supreme court will not hear a 2A related case at this time.
Gee, I wonder what'll happen.
Gun violence goes up with no way to prevent it.
I don't like the precedent but if cities are allowed to do this with immigration policies (I'm also on the cities' side on that issue) I don't see why that precedent wouldn't extend to... everything tbh.
me and my guns need a safe space from those safe-space-needing librerals
If you wish to not enforce the law based on your beliefs, we'll do the same. It's a Pandora's Box.
Not commenting one way or the other on this issue but it's really interesting how pro-gun Facepunch has become over the past few years while it is usually quite a liberal place on every other issue.
Are you sure it's all of fp, or just a few users that feel strongly about the issue making a point of commenting in any news articles about it? Don't let a relatively small sample size equal the entire group. That said, while I don't like guns personally (as far as handling them myself), the second amendment exists, and local laws that are unconstitutional are just that.
“If they want to have their own laws, that’s fine. Don’t shove them on us down here,” said Dave Campbell, a member of the board of Effingham County, Illinois, about 215 miles (350 km) south of Chicago. Lol my wife just got an interview for a job in that town.
Their is a pretty large sect of Pro-Gun Liberals that have been arising over the years. Most of which have come into existence after the reality check of, "You do know these gun control regulations are specifically targeting the poor and minorities right..?" and let me tell ya: It's a hell of a reality check.
FP is thoroughly libertarian leftist in general, so people tend to think individual rights are extremely important but also believe in higher taxes to support better education and socialised medicine. I disagree with FP on guns mostly, but it is feverishly complex and it is pretty impossible to have a cordial debate on here if you have even slightly anti-gun views, as you get attacked a fair bit and it just gets a bit depressing for me.
Watch how hard they will backflip when ethnic minorities consider the need to carry in order to protect themselves from racist hicks and police brutality, just like lawmakers (Democrat and Republican) backflipped when the Black Panthers started open-carrying during their patrols.
I don't think FP is pro-gun on the whole, but it's possible to discuss the topic here without getting shouted down and dogpiled which is refreshing compared to a lot of other internet forums. Would you be interested in having a discussion about this opinion? I'm not going to argue with a brick wall for 10 pages anymore, but if you'd be willing to read what I write I'll put in the effort.
How about they just make sure background checks are actually completed properly instead of being snowflakey hicks? Oh wait, it's not the 1990s anymore, everyone in America is fucking insane and there's no such thing as healthy compromise.
I wonder what will happen the moment a non-white person goes into these areas with a gun. I'm sure their stance on gun-control will change really quickly.
Tbh I used to respond to a lot of gun threads on here but I eventually stopped. I didn't get convinced that my anti-gun views were wrong, but there's just 0 point in having the gun debate when anyone anti-gun is shouted down and personally attacked.
Well Regulated
In the eighteenth century lexicon, "well regulated" described something that was working smoothly and reliably, ie a well-regulated clock.
"Militia"
The framers believed that a smoothly functioning (well regulated) volunteer (of the people) militia was necessary to the security of a free state.
If you want to contribute to a discussion, it helps to know what you're talking about before offering an opinion. Like, I'm not saying that as a zinger, just that I don't even know where to start with that sentence. Background checks are performed by the FBI (a federal organization), background checks are already mandatory on all dealer sales, local sheriffs have no way to affect it one way or the other, so what are you talking about? Also, I'm going to go ahead and say that 'gun sanctuaries' are a bad thing for exactly the same reason immigration sanctuaries are: law enforcement being able to selectively choose whether or not to enforce federal law gives them a legislative authority that they're not supposed to have. Court is where unjust laws are supposed to be struck down. Judges make that call, not sheriffs.
Also the framers of the constitution were wrong
What's the point of this series of posts? You try to cite the amendment itself to justify gun laws, then when you're corrected on your citations suddenly the document sucks and the people who wrote it were wrong. What are you trying to do?
If I start a polygamist cult and start hoarding guns with 2A people defend me as a "sanctuary city"
Are you sober?
The document was written by white supremacists to optimize the subjugation of poor whites and black and the point of the 2nd amendment was to put down rebellions not encourage it. The 2nd amendment is fucking stupid and should be rewritten
How would you rewrite it? I'm inviting you to a discussion, not trying to shut you down. Can you leave the zingers where you found them?
And I personally don't give a shit what the lexicon of the 18th century was, I think we can easily interpret "well regulated" to mean "not every nutjob gets a fucking gun" because that would be fucking stupid
I'm discussing what it does mean, not what it should mean. It does mean that every nutjob gets a gun. I don't necessarily agree with that, and that's why I don't cite 2A in arguments except against total bans.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.