Globe: A few New England towns have joined the misguided Second Amendment sanctuary movement. It’s dangerous.

Buck Faker

NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2015
Messages
2,317
Likes
2,414
Location
SE MA

EDITORIAL
The rising threat of ‘gun sanctuaries’
A few New England towns have joined the misguided Second Amendment sanctuary movement. It’s dangerous.

When Shane Cox started manufacturing and selling unregistered short-barrel rifles and silencers in his Chanute, Kan., gun store roughly six years ago, he believed that the state’s new Second Amendment Protection Act shielded him from federal prosecution. So did his customer Jeremy Kettler, a veteran who bought one of Cox’s “Made in Kansas” suppressors. Kettler was so excited that he posted a video about the purchase on Facebook.

You’ve probably guessed what happened next: Cox and Kettler were soon convicted for federal gun violations. It is illegal to make and sell unregistered firearms and their accessories under federal law, and states can’t legally nullify national laws they don’t like. And yet, in 2013, Kansas legislators passed a law declaring that any federal gun-control laws did not apply to firearms, accessories, and ammunition manufactured and kept within the borders of the deeply red state. Cox even gave copies of that state law to his customers. Kettler later said he bought the unregistered silencer “because of a piece of paper signed by the governor saying it was legal.” He lambasted his state government for “setting up its citizens to be prosecuted by the United States of America.”

The nationwide rise of so-called Second Amendment sanctuary jurisdictions, where local governments pass ordinances vowing not to enforce state or federal gun-control laws, has quickened since then. More than 400 municipalities in 20 states, including at least one city in Maine, and a few in Vermont and Rhode Island, have declared themselves such sanctuaries. In Virginia — where a recent pro-gun rally drew thousands of Second Amendment advocates and fully armed militia to protest a strict new state gun law — more than 120 cities, towns, and counties enacted similar resolutions in a two-month period.

These ordinances, whose exact details vary widely from place to place, are by and large legally meaningless. Still, their growing numbers are a troubling development. These votes have the potential to confuse residents about their rights, deter those threatened by guns from using legal protections, and set up gun owners and local authorities for legal trouble.

With these resolutions, local elected officials say they will refuse to enforce gun laws they feel are unconstitutional, such as the so-called red flag or “extreme risk” regulations that 17 states have passed, which let family members or law enforcement ask a judge to temporarily remove guns from someone who seems to be a risk to themselves or others.

Of course, local officials can’t make constitutional determinations, and the Supreme Court — which can — has established that the right afforded by the Second Amendment is not unlimited. In 2008, the Supreme Court took its last major gun case, where Justice Antonin Scalia, in the majority opinion, wrote that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Gun safety advocates fear that Second Amendment sanctuary policies could have real-life consequences. For instance, a resident of one of those towns might not report a loved one in legal possession of a gun who may be at risk of committing suicide, homicide, or even a mass shooting if they feel that their local sheriff will not enforce a judge’s order to remove that person’s gun.

The gun sanctuary movement took its name from the trend among liberal jurisdictions to label themselves sanctuary cities where local police won’t cooperate with immigration authorities. But as those cities and states have found, there’s really no such thing as sanctuary from the federal government for immigrants, and indeed there can be severe consequences for local officials who try to skirt federal law. Liberal cities made a misleading promise to immigrants without legal status — which conservative jurisdictions now seem intent to imitate with their gun policies.

That cities and towns of all political stripes increasingly feel pressure from citizens to nullify state and federal laws is a symptom of political dysfunction and polarization. But it’s also a dangerous trend that risks actual harm. Proponents of Second Amendment sanctuary may think they’re standing on principle, but by sowing confusion they’re just putting their communities — including gun owners themselves — at risk.
 

Shark_Cage

NES Member
Rating - 100%
2   0   0
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
3,690
Likes
2,151
Location
Reading, MA
Well if you want to f with the ATF, have fun. It’s a whole different kettle of fish at the local and State level.

F around and find out.
 

jpk

Rating - 100%
3   0   0
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
18,339
Likes
12,178
*violin playing in the background as tears fall to the keyboard*
The irony is stunning......

Nullification is GOOD when its an issue that leftists support (MJ is one example of many)

Nullification is "BAD" or "Dangerous" when its an issue leftists OPPOSE.......(insert gunz or any number of other issues).

Furthermore its another example of propaganda outlets like the blob to sensationalize things and use language to try to de-legitimize something they disagree with....classic yellow press
 

Twigg

NES Member
Rating - 100%
72   0   0
Joined
Mar 23, 2006
Messages
13,640
Likes
3,470
Location
Live Free or Die !
Moar liberals flapping' their gums, running' in circles & screaming at the sky. All they got is hate. They hate our
president, they hate our freedom, they don't even know what kind of country we have much less how our government actually functions. Dim-0-Rat politicians have seized the ignorance of the mindless masses and spoon feed it back to them. I think the only thing which can save our republic is either another civil war or a global pandemic. Whatever's coming it's not gonna be nice. Stack it deep and however you can find it.
 

TLB

Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
5,220
Likes
2,972
Location
Heading for greener pastures
Total crap angle because these New England towns and Virginia aren't flouting federal law, but rather disregarding illegal (unconstitutional) state laws as far as I know. Yet, they bring up an example in Kansas to suit their agenda. For the record, I'm not against localities declaring they won't follow federal law either. But that is definitely more dangerous to play around with... Let's just simplify things and repeal the NFA and GCA, shall we?
 

556USER

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Dec 19, 2018
Messages
507
Likes
560
Location
Northshore MA
Moar liberals flapping' their gums, running' in circles & screaming at the sky. All they got is hate. They hate our
president, they hate our freedom, they don't even know what kind of country we have much less how our government actually functions. Dim-0-Rat politicians have seized the ignorance of the mindless masses and spoon feed it back to them. I think the only thing which can save our republic is either another civil war or a global pandemic. Whatever's coming it's not gonna be nice. Stack it deep and however you can find it.
I could not have stated it better!
 

Peaceseeker

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
591
Likes
57
"It is illegal to make and sell unregistered firearms and their accessories under federal law, and states can’t legally nullify national laws they don’t like."


Yuh.......glad the Globe has also been as diligent in expressing this same proclivity for Rule-of-Law, re the Federal immigration statutes.....
 

LoginName

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
17,557
Likes
7,455
I wonder what the authors opinion is about states that have legalized medical and recreational marijuana in defiance of federal law
even though the legislature and governor of those states said it was ok?

As of now, the only thing stopping the DEA from coming crashing down on them is that neither party (or Trump), wants to
face the blow back and consequences of enforcing it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% in favor of legalization, but don't play two different sides beacuse one of them just happens to be about 'gunz'.
 

Reptile

NES Member
Rating - 100%
98   0   0
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
15,340
Likes
5,163
OUCH!!!

I thought it read "Massachusetts towns".

Wishfull thinking.

Oh well...


I wonder what the authors opinion is about states that have legalized medical and recreational marijuana in defiance of federal law
even though the legislature and governor of those states said it was ok?

As of now, the only thing stopping the DEA from coming crashing down on them is that neither party (or Trump), wants to
face the blow back and consequences of enforcing it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm 100% in favor of legalization, but don't play two different sides beacuse one of them just happens to be about 'gunz'.
Don't worry, even though Mass allows MJ, (against federal law), they will use the consumption of MJ to take away your guns if they know you use both MJ and guns.

They wont deport criminal aliens but you can bet they will throw you in jail for a "hi cap" mag.
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
3,213
Likes
2,219
Location
Merrimack Valley
So if a MA town becomes a 2 sanctuary, and said town has a FFL, does that mean we can buy fully assembled glocks over the counter? 🤔
 

EC1

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Sep 19, 2007
Messages
7,067
Likes
1,446
Location
Somewhere
Total crap angle because these New England towns and Virginia aren't flouting federal law, but rather disregarding illegal (unconstitutional) state laws as far as I know. Yet, they bring up an example in Kansas to suit their agenda. For the record, I'm not against localities declaring they won't follow federal law either. But that is definitely more dangerous to play around with... Let's just simplify things and repeal the NFA and GCA, shall we?
tack on to that: "take away an AG's control of consumer safety guidelines".
 

FancyGunz

NES Member
Rating - 88.9%
8   1   0
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
585
Likes
242
What a bunch of baloney.

Pot: states can do whatever they want, screw you!
Marriage: states can do whatever they want, screw you! Also, you're homophobic!
Illegal immigration: states can do whatever they want, screw you! Also, you're xenophobic!
Gun bans: states can do whatever they want, screw you! Also, you're a redneck!
Gun sanctuaries: OMG you are breaking FEDERAL laws, that's "dangerous" and illegal!! You must follow the letter of the law!
 

Dennis in MA

NES Member
Rating - 100%
25   0   0
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
19,118
Likes
10,318
Pick a side, folks. Either sanctuary areas are wrong or they are right. You can't straddle this one.

Yes, I concur that 2A is sacrosanct. But this is something that has to filter through the Judicial branch.

And no, I don't think I'd be buying a "non-federal" silencer ever. That was just asking to be B-slapped. LOL
 
Top Bottom