Opinions and comments made by me on this forum should not be considered legal advice.
Did I say it would come from the Feds? I said our governor and AG. Did you even read my posting? Or is it a knee jerk reaction.?
Nobody is "laying back." There is a state rep, Wittenberg, who introduces a "red flag" law every year. It's there. There is also a bill introduced by my state senator, Bayer, that changes the existing state law regarding handguns (registration, UBC, etc.) so that it applies to ALL firearms. The ONLY reason those bills haven't gone anywhere yet is because the Repubs are in the majority. You can bet that if the Dems get control, we would get that and more.
Yes, you made it seem like if Bernie won, that the left would push the red flag issue. I said that red flag issue has been pushed by the left AND the right. Did you read what I wrote?
Regardless, most of what I have seen from the Sanctuary movement hasn't made me all that hopeful.
Opinions and comments made by me on this forum should not be considered legal advice.
This is only a half thought through comment, so be gentle if you pummel it.
I think pre-emptively creating a sanctuary city shows weakness and is a bad idea.
Illegal alien sanctuary cities were created to hide/protect an action that is illegal. The reverse of what is being done with 2nd amendment sanctuaries.
Creating a 2nd amendment sanctuary seems like a few things to me:
1. It feels like making the statement that we give up and have come to terms with the eventuality of the State impacting our rights. Not the message rolling around in my mind.
2. Why should I have to take sanctuary from the State harming my rights? Seems like hiding from the bully so he doesn't take your lunch money, when instead you should be learning how to make a shank. Kidding....kinda
3. Backing up to our county or city and declaring it is a sanctuary seems like giving up the State to those we are looking to fight. And a sanctuary from the people who are supposed to work for us? Seems like it just sends the message that 'we get it, you're the boss, but we're going to give you mean looks'.
If red flag laws or other further line-crossing events happen, go ahead and enact the sanctuary. Let them know we disagree with the infringement and won't recognize it. But doing it before hand seems like waving a white flag.
I shall go back to my adult beverage and let the regularly scheduled programming resume.
"But then there are plenty of gun folks who think no one should rock the boat because it might piss off the anti gun crowd/politicians and cause even more gun control." - Bikenut
Submissive gun rights advocates need to lose their submissiveness before we lose our 2A rights.
Uh...no I don't see it that way. I see it as "We know what you're planning to do. After all you haven't been trying to hide it. But even if you're successful at passing unconstitutional gun laws, rather than fighting it for years in the courts, we're simply exhibiting mass non-compliance, and with the blessings of our Sheriffs."
I'm hoping it may lead gun-control debates to the eventual answer "Why bother? Do we really want to create a whole new class of criminal?"
Iosco county officially added, full support.
This is where I struggle with the 2A sanctuary thing. I get the impression that there is little cohesiveness in what's being requested, no guidance except we have to do this. I'd liked to see this better organized so when it is presented to the County's there is continuity throughout the state, at least that way it makes it sound like on voice.