New gun control laws began springing up in states like Washington, Illinois, New Mexico, Oregon, Colorado, and elsewhere. In cases where Democratic legislatures and governors didn’t impose new restrictions, voters themselves did by supporting ballot initiatives aimed at infringing further upon a right that is supposed to be untouchable under the Constitution.
In Washington, for instance, voters approved legislation prohibiting anyone from buying a rifle under the age of 21 (though it’s 18 under federal law), mandating firearms safety courses prior to gun purchases, imposing new storage requirements, adding additional background checks for anyone seeking to buy an “assault” rifle, and new waiting periods.
In the past, citizens and local law enforcement officials meekly accepted each new firearms restriction — each new “infringement” on a constitutional right that specifically states “shall not be infringed.”
But not this time.
Left-wing Democrats in several states and jurisdictions appear to have overreached regarding their pet issue of gun control, and now a rebellion of sorts against these new infringements has been launched and is growing. And even more ironic: Efforts to set up “gun sanctuaries” are being modeled on Leftist Democrats’ decades-long practice of protecting people in the country illegally with “sanctuary city” policies.
“No one – and I mean no one – is arguing that immigration sanctuary cities aren’t having an effect on federal immigration law. This bill in Texas uses the same approach of withdrawing resources and enforcement support, but it takes on federal gun control,” said Michael Boldin of the Tenth Amendment Center. “More conservative states should do the exact same thing.”
As Reuters reported recently:
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.
The news service noted that resistance to the new laws has been especially prevalent in four states — Washington, Oregon, New Mexico, and Illinois — though they are controlled by Democrats.
As noted by The Free Thought Project, federal gun control laws are essentially unenforceable without state assistance:
The federal government relies heavily on state cooperation to implement and enforce almost all of its laws, regulations and acts – including gun control. By simply withdrawing this necessary cooperation, states can nullify in effect many federal actions. As noted by the National Governor’s Association during the partial government shutdown of 2013, “states are partners with the federal government on most federal programs.”
“Partnerships don’t work too well when half the team quits,” Boldin said. “By withdrawing all resources and participation in federal gun control schemes, the states can effectively bring them down.”
Noted Dave Campbell, a member of the Effingham County Board in Illinois, in a comment to Reuters, "If they want to have their own laws, that’s fine. Don’t shove them on us down here.”
He told the newswire service that 63 jurisdictions in his state had already passed a firearms sanctuary policy, and more are liable to follow.
The reactions of Leftist Democrats have been as predictable as it is hypocritical: Anger and pompous disbelief.
In Washington, for example, Democratic Gov. Jay Inslee has come out firmly in support of his state’s new gun control ballot initiative, I-1639, which was passed by some 57 percent of voters. His Democratic attorney general, Bob Ferguson, has sent out a letter advising sheriffs around the state who have implemented gun sanctuary policies “they could be held liable” if they 'allow' a dangerous person to obtain a firearm who later uses it to commit harm.
“In the event a police chief or sheriff refuses to perform the background check required by Initiative 1639, they could be held liable if there is a sale or transfer of a firearm to a dangerous individual prohibited from possessing a firearm and that individual uses that firearm to do harm,” Ferguson said in an open letter to the state’s law enforcement heads.
But sheriffs are pushing back. Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer called the warning a “bluff” and said he has no plans to enforce I-1639.
“Unfortunately for the governor and the attorney general, they’re not my boss. My only boss is the people that elected me to office,” he told Reuters.
Leftist Democrats opposed to these new gun sanctuaries have no real standing to refute them. This is especially true in cities and states where sanctuary policies protecting illegal immigrants from federal immigration officials are in place or states that have ‘legalized’ recreational pot use in contravention of federal law.
As The National Sentinel reports, the “gun sanctuary rebellion” could spread to California next, home to some of the most restrictive gun laws on the books. There, gun ownership has doubled within a decade, according to state figures, and given the push to split the state into thirds, a rebellious faction is already in place.
As gun sanctuaries spread — and they are certain to do so — there is a growing feeling that as one lawless act begets another, the country’s breakup may not be far off.