Oregon Sheriffs Won't Enforce New Gun Law

During the New Mexico gun control battle of three years ago, which led to many counties declaring themselves "Sanctuary Counties", we found that when the going got tough, we could rely on the state's county sheriffs to side with the people and their Second Amendment rights.

In Oregon, their county sheriffs have taken a stand that they won't enforce a new gun control law that the state's voters passed.

From Fox News:

County sheriffs in Oregon are taking a stand against the state's newly-adopted gun law and say they will not enforce a major piece of the law that sets limits on magazine capacity because it violates the Second Amendment, wastes law enforcement resources and is the product of "pure anti-gun politics."

Measure 114, known as the Reduction of Gun Violence Act, was approved by Oregon voters in last week's midterm election. The new law outlaws ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, and requires police to maintain an electronic, searchable database of all firearm permits, provide additional hands-on firearm training, and collect fingerprints from people before issuing permits to purchase a gun.

To read more, go here. 

Newton Co., Missouri: Sheriffs Can Arrest Feds Who Violate Citizens’ Gun Rights

There is one Missouri county who takes the Second Amendment rights of citizens very seriously.

They have passed an ordinance that any infringement laws by the federal government are null and void and gives the county sheriff the power to arrest any federal agent trying to enforce such laws.

According to the Daily Wire:

One Missouri County, concerned that the federal government might infringe on the Second Amendment rights of its citizens, passed an ordinance this month which would invalidate any such attempt by the federal government.

The Second Amendment Preservation Act of Newton County, Missouri, states:

Be it enacted by the Newton County Missouri Commission as follows: All federal acts, laws, orders, rules and regulations passed by the Federal government and specifically any Presidential Administration whether past, present or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the United States and Article 1, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in the county, shall not be recognized by this county, and specifically rejected by this county, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect in this county.

Such acts, laws, orders, rules and regulations include but are not limited to any tax levy, fee, or stamp imposed on firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition not common to all other goods and services … any registration or tracking of firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition … any act ordering the confiscation of firearms, firearm accessories or ammunition … and finally, any act, whether past, present or future passed by the United States Congress and signed into law by the Federal Government and specifically any Presidential Administration which infringes on the people’s right to keep and bear arms in Newton County, Missouri shall be considered null and void by the county and not recognized by this county.

The law adds: “Any and all federal agents trying to enforce the regulations listed in Section (1) shall be subject to arrest by the Sheriff’s department.”

More counties around the country should enact similar ordinances. 

To read more, go here. 

The Looming Gun Control Showdown

Radical leftist Democrats in congress are planning to pass gun control bills now that they control both the House and Senate as well as the White House.

A showdown (or showdowns) is looming.

Forbes takes a look at the upcoming battle over Second Amendment rights.

Some snippets:

Gun control rhetoric from Dems is nothing new, but by holding slim majorities in the House and Senate and with Biden in the White House, they’re feeling emboldened that now is the time to move on a wide variety of gun control measures that had heretofore been stymied by a gun-friendly Trump administration and Republican majorities in at least one of two legislative bodies.

Mostly missing in the national political debate over guns, however, is where law enforcement stands regarding their willingness to enforce proposed or newly enacted gun laws. As Colorado legislators discovered in 2019 and 2020 when ‘red flag’ legislation passed—designed to allow police to seize guns from people suspected of posing a significant danger to themselves or others—laws are meaningless without enforcement.  

Dozens of the state’s 64 sheriffs publicly proclaimed the bill unconstitutional and refused to enforce the new law, with roughly half of the state’s county governments passing resolutions stating that they do not support enforcing such laws or will not, “infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms,” as one county board phrased it.

Sheriff Steve Reams of Colorado’s rural Weld County became one of the leading voices opposing the legislation and he made the rounds on the national news talk-show circuit to share his sentiments. “If a judge issues an order saying a person can’t possess weapons, and also compels law enforcement to perform a search warrant to seek out those guns,” said Reams, “I believe that’s a violation of a person’s constitutional rights. I have a hard choice at that point. I can potentially violate someone’s constitutional rights. Or I can violate a court order. I would rather be on the side of violating a court order than someone’s rights.”

At the center of gun rights advocate’s concerns regarding red flag laws is the lack of meaningful due process. “What if a disgruntled ex-lover has a vendetta against their former significant other and wants to use these laws as retaliation?” asks George Brauchler [This actually happened to me five years ago. - A.], former District Attorney for Colorado’s Douglas, Arapahoe, Elbert and Lincoln counties, who narrowly lost a bid to become the state’s Attorney General and who has prosecuted some of the nation’s most notorious mass shootings, including the Columbine High School and Aurora Theater massacres. “We expect our justice system to make an abuse of our laws nearly impossible to achieve. Many of these red flag laws do not. A person unfairly targeted by someone using a red flag law isn’t given a fair chance to defend themselves in the court of law before a judge can call for the confiscation of their firearms. There is more due process protecting your privilege to drive than your right to bear arms.”

To read more, go here. 

Sheriffs Won't Enforce Newsom's Curfew

California county sheriffs are rebelling against Gov. Gavin Newsom by not enforcing Newsom's 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. curfew.

According to Newsweek:

Multiple California sheriffs say they will refuse to enforce California Governor Gavin Newsom's new curfew designed to slow the rapid spread of COVID-19.

Newsom announced on Thursday that due to the virus "spreading at a pace we haven't seen since the start of this pandemic," he was issuing a "limited" stay-at-home order that will go into effect on Saturday, including a curfew from 10 p.m. to 5 a.m. in areas that comprise over 94 percent of the state's population. Shortly after the announcement was made, several county sheriffs insisted they would defy the governor by not enforcing the curfew.

Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims said that she would refuse to "make criminals out of normally law abiding citizens" by enforcing the order during a news briefing, adding that she had not "seen any data that shows" the virus spreads more at night. When announcing the order, Newsom said that the curfew was intended to limit opportunities for the virus to spread by reducing the amount of overall contacts between people.

To read the full article, go here.