I'm going to make a prediction. Much in the same way that some cities have become a safe-haven for illegal immigrants, some cities and towns will be enacting a sort of “Second Amendment Sanctuary City” status.
After all, if you're reading this humble website I can bet that we likely agree on one thing: Gun control violates the Second Amendment.
If you don't agree with that, I'm sure that we can agree that you're here just to troll us. That's fine, and who am I to violate your First Amendment right?
In fact, if you're on the gun grabbing side I hope to sway you a bit so keep reading. But, for now, onward to my next point …
Second Amendment Sanctuary Cities are already among us. Brian reported on one Washington city, here, that is already ruling gun control measures as unconstitutional. The main issue with the way that city is doing it, is that it isn't clear if they have the support of the local Sheriff, which is a necessity for keeping out the gun grabbers.
The county Sheriff, though not present in three of the 50 states, is often regarded as the highest law enforcement officer in the land–capable of removing federal and even un-elected state officials from within its boarders–will likely be needed to go up against all that will come down upon that small city in Washington.
Make no mistake, they are taking a page right out of our opponent's book and applying it to gun rights. After all, the right of self-defense is written in the law of the land and shall not be infringed. (We'll touch more on the supreme law of the land in a bit.) Further, when the Second was written it applied to all arms to include those the military had–not just pea shooters.
Therefore, we can surmise that as it stands today the founding fathers would also expect that the Second Amendment apply to semi-automatic guns, like the Ar-15.
This isn't the first time something like this happened, though. Back in 2013 a small number of county Sheriffs chose a similar path, as reported on here. One of the Sheriffs is even reported to have said this:
Any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the president offending the constitutional rights of my citizens shall not be enforced by me or by my deputies … In summary, it is the position of this sheriff that I refuse to participate, or stand idly by, while my citizens are turned into criminals due to the unconstitutional actions of misguided politicians.
How outstanding is that? This time around we aren't fighting against a Tyrannical federal government, but confused (or corrupted) state governments.
Where do police stand? I know some county police officers. I even know one in the gun-hating state of Maryland who I'll leave anonymous for his protection. In a conversation with him one day, guns came up. What he said strengthened my belief that most cops are on our side, ultimately. Here are his words:
I believe in a citizen's right to carry.
Even in the most profoundly anti-gun state in the country, this county police officer believes in the citizen's right to protect him or herself. He believes in the Second Amendment. I'm not a betting man, but if I were, I'd bet that county police officers across the nation believe similarly.
Many folks are likely wondering how this is even possible. I mean, how can a lowly, local cop go up against his/her state? I'll make an attempt to break this down the best I can. Please understand that I'm not an attorney and this is just my understanding of things how they currently are.
We have what is known as the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution. It is Article Six, Clause 2. It basically says that what is found in the Constitution and laws derived from it, should be followed regardless of what the local or state laws say. The local county and even city police can cite the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution as the supreme law of the land and that the gun control laws are unconstitutional regarding our interpretation of the Second Amendment.
This is how the Supremacy Clause reads:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Interesting stuff huh? When you get down to the bare bones of it, that local police chief cited in Brian's article or any Sheriff who stands up to anti-gun legislation at the state level is only following the RIGHT law, being that the Second Amendment says the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
If (and until) that Amendment is repealed or overturned in some way the states must (should?) (please?) follow the federal laws on the books. To do anything else would be illegal. And, in all honesty, I think it's about time we had a Supreme Court ruling on the Second Amendment. We need to firm up what it means so everyone has to follow it, regardless of beliefs.
What do you think? Let us know in the comments below.
Then do yourself a favor and stack as much as you can on your side with Branca's highly acclaimed The Law Of Self-Defense book.