ROANOKE, Va. (AP)- Local officials in a handful of Virginia counties have voted to honor and defend gun rights by declaring their counties to be “Second Amendment Sanctuaries.”
The movement has spread in Virginia since the Nov. 5 election, when Democrats gained majority control of both the state Senate and House of Delegates.
Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam has said his party’s leaders will push for gun control measures.
The Roanoke Times reports that Appomattox, Campbell, Charlotte, Carroll and Pittsylvania counties have passed sanctuary resolutions. Amherst and Franklin counties are considering adopting similar measures.
On Tuesday, more than 350 people wearing “Guns Save Lives” badges appeared before the Franklin County Board of Supervisors, who directed staff to draw up a resolution after consulting with the sheriff, commonwealth’s attorney and county attorney.
Kearn SCHEMM says
Let us hope that Northampton County joins the list of Second Amendment Sanctuary counties in Virginia.
Gene Kelly says
YES!
Deborah A. Bender says
Northampton county needs to get on this quickly!
Sorin Varzaru says
At some point, in one of these counties, someone will report that a gun owner is showing signs of going off the rails. A judge will be convinced and issue an order for the law enforcement to remove that person’s weapons. The sheriff will refuse because they think the order is not constitutional. The gun owner will go ahead on a rampage and kill a whole bunch of people. I am curious how it will pay out from there.
Ray Otton says
Eh, you guys started the whole “sanctuary” thing with your support for Democrat run cities defying federal immigration laws.
Demonstrating for all the country to see that you are in favor of ignoring laws you don’t like while insisting we follow laws you do like.
Sorin Varzaru says
Maybe so. but one difference is that that those cities don’t seem to be violating the federal law (otherwise I would expect the feds would charge someone with something). In the case of the 2A sanctuaries I heard Sheriffs saying they would defy court orders.
Another difference is that not turning in to the feds an illegal immigrant seeking police or emergency services (for example) is a lot less likely to cause death or harm to others then ignoring a court order to remove weapons from someone who showed sufficient signs of being dangerous to convince a judge.
All of that being said, I am not a big fan of the concept of sanctuary cities. I think it provides the politicians a way to not deal with a problem we have.
Ray Otton says
“Maybe so. but one difference is that that those cities don’t seem to be violating the federal law.”
Wut?
Of course they’re violating Federal law and the fact the Feds aren’t pursuing it doesn’t mean they aren’t in violation. Just like when you do 65 out on Rt 13 and the constabulary looks the other way. That doesn’t mean you aren’t breaking the law.
It is an easily confirmed fact that sanctuary cities are dangerous and irresponsible. The citizens living there pay a steep price so that sanctuary city politicians can score cheap political points. Refusing to honor federal detainer requests for dangerous criminals already in police custody increases the likelihood of those dangerous criminals returning to our communities, putting the public at greater risk.
Plainly speaking it is madness and criminally negligent.
================================================
“Another difference is that not turning in to the feds an illegal immigrant seeking police or emergency services (for example) is a lot less likely to cause death or harm to others then ignoring a court order to remove weapons from someone who showed sufficient signs of being dangerous to convince a judge.”
Yeah, no.
Non-citizens constitute about 7% of the population. Yet data from the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics reveals that non-citizens accounted for 64% of all federal arrests in 2018.
These arrests aren’t for immigration crimes. Non-citizens accounted for 24% of federal drug arrests, 25% of federal property arrests, and 28% of federal fraud arrests.
The statistics reveal the danger created by sanctuary policies. The refusal to cooperate with federal immigration officials suggests that state and local officials supporting the sanctuary movement believe it’s better to let these criminals return to their communities rather than being removed from this country.
Really makes you wonder, just what are they thinking?
Sorin Varzaru says
“Wut? Of course they’re violating Federal law and the fact the Feds aren’t pursuing it doesn’t mean they aren’t in violation. ”
Come on Ray, considering how pissed off is Trump at the sanctuary cities, if he thought there was any way he could make an example out of them, he’d prosecute. Be real here. Try to read some neutral opinions on this and you’ll see that they dance on the line there.
As far as the other stats you mentioned, they are misleading in many ways and you know it. The stats claimed that non-citizens are 7 percent of population. First it’s not hard to imagine that people who are illegally here won’t admit it, so it’s extremely likely that that 7% is a lot lower then reality. Then with the current’s administration push on arresting illegal immigrants, they can say whatever they want on the reason they arrest them, but ultimately what counts is the number of prosecutions which is 15%. A lot of that is probably a drug offence like possession of weed, and it just pads the “non-immigration related” arrest numbers
As I said before, I personally don’t agree with the concept of sanctuary cities in principle, it seems like anarchy, but all this “immigrants are rapists and criminals” is bullshit. People need a scapegoat for their problems and for the conservative crowd it’s the immigrants.
Ray Otton says
I don’t know what happens in these thread but at some point you can’t respond directly so you have to find a logical place to continue the discussion.
Couple of things for Sorin –
You said “You know who also can’t say anything, the children killed by guns every year in US at a rate 35 TIMES higher then other industrialized nations.” And you added a bunch of other telling stats.
NONE of which come close to the 30 million dead babies since Roe V Wade in 1972. (40% of whom are minority children. Margret Sanger must be so proud. Her advocacy for racial genocide is working better than she even hoped.)
Simply put, we just ain’t moved by the crocodile tears and cries of “If it saves just one child’s life, we have to do something about gun violence”. And we sure aren’t going to be preached to by people who advocate chopping up babies in the womb.
People in glass houses, don cha know.
Another important stat gun control advocates pass right by in their unending quest to take our guns is that between 300,000 and 2,000,000 times a year LAW ABIDING citizens protect themselves and their families from from criminal attacks using firearms.
That would be families with children.
So again, don’t attempt to throw stats unless you have ALL the stats.
“Come on Ray, considering how pissed off is Trump at the sanctuary cities, if he thought there was any way he could make an example out of them, he’d prosecute. Be real here. Try to read some neutral opinions on this and you’ll see that they dance on the line there.”
Second point first.
Stop with the condescending tone. Don’t make the “Fox News” argument wherein you dismiss opposing opinions because you think the people involved have been horribly swayed by right wing propaganda.
I know this comes as a shock but studies show Conservatives are actually more likely to read opposing views than Liberals are. Not that we agree with them but we do read them. If for no other reason than to have superior points to make in forums like this.
It’s called know your enemy.
I hate to make a blanket statement because it”s such a Liberal thing to do……but basically the problem with our discourse is that Liberals firmly believe they hold the moral high ground so they have no incentive, no reason, to listen to opposing views.
You should be a non-conventional Liberal and accept that not everything you know is true.
Another thing you need to know is that Fox News is trending AWAY from Conservative viewpoints. You would know this if you actually did what you said and watched some Conservative media. It’s all over Conservative media that Fox News is not what it was five years ago. You couldn’t miss it……..if you actually visited them.
To the first point.
Mr. Trump is trying mightily to stop the madness but he’s been blocked by various federal judges in his attempts to build that wall and stop the sanctuary cities with the one weapon he possess, money.
You would know this too…if you visited Conservative media sites.
Anyhow, the question still remains. Why would any sane, rational person advocate for releasing known criminals back into the general population when they could turn them over to the Feds and have them removed from the country?
????????????????? hmmmmm.
Sorin Varzaru says
“Simply put, we just ain’t moved by the crocodile tears and cries of “If it saves just one child’s life, we have to do something about gun violence”. And we sure aren’t going to be preached to by people who advocate chopping up babies in the womb.”
So it’s ok scores of people die unnecessary deaths because democrats advocate abortions? That type of logic is impossible for me to follow.
“Another important stat gun control advocates pass right by in their unending quest to take our guns is that between 300,000 and 2,000,000 times a year LAW ABIDING citizens protect themselves and their families from from criminal attacks using firearms.”
I would be curious to see the source of those statistics.
“It’s called know your enemy”
When people refer to the other party as the “enemy” it’s when it hits the fan. I am hoping that point of view is limited to a small subset of the conservative crowd.
“I hate to make a blanket statement because it”s such a Liberal thing to do……but basically the problem with our discourse is that Liberals firmly believe they hold the moral high ground so they have no incentive, no reason, to listen to opposing views.”
That seems to go both ways, doesn’t it now? Maybe you listen to opposing views, but how wide spread is that?
“You should be a non-conventional Liberal and accept that not everything you know is true.”
The fact that I am considered liberal these days would be amusing if it wasn’t … nuts.
“Another thing you need to know is that Fox News is trending AWAY from Conservative viewpoints. You would know this if you actually did what you said and watched some Conservative media. It’s all over Conservative media that Fox News is not what it was five years ago. You couldn’t miss it……..if you actually visited them.”
Ha, I noticed that they started to be a little bit less biased, I take it that is bad 🙂 You are right, i guess I am not reading the extreme conservative media, I just can’t stomach it, it makes me feel ill.
“Mr. Trump is trying mightily to stop the madness but he’s been blocked by various federal judges in his attempts to build that wall and stop the sanctuary cities with the one weapon he possess, money.”
You are changing the subject. I have heard of NO attempt to prosecute any person for a breach of federal law on the topic of Sanctuary cities. If the federal law is broken I would expect indictments. Where are they?
“Anyhow, the question still remains. Why would any sane, rational person advocate for releasing known criminals back into the general population when they could turn them over to the Feds and have them removed from the country?”
No sane rational person would do that. When did it happen? Examples? Statistics? Numbers?
Publius Americanus says
Kate Steinle, and the multitudes of others slaughtered by you liberal’s pets(or, your latest slaves as we all know that was a %100 Democrat institution) were unavailable to comment on your asinine statement.
Publius Americanus says
“You are changing the subject. I have heard of NO attempt to prosecute any person for a breach of federal law on the topic of Sanctuary cities. If the federal law is broken I would expect indictments. Where are they?”
One does not “indict’ a city.
BUT Seattle, Chicago and San Franpoopsco have all SUED the Trump Admin for the admin’s attempt to hold back Federal Funds to Sanctuary cities. Of course, an Obama judge blocked the President’s attempts.
“No sane rational person would do that. When did it happen? Examples? Statistics? Numbers?”
Of course no sane rational person would do that, but of course we aren’t talking about sane rational people, we are talking about liberals.
SO, :
https://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11187.pdf
Now, wanna have some real ‘fun”? Google the term………”illegal immingrant released by sanctuary city kills”
and read the millions of returns.
Your side is sick, fascinated with murder and death, and really is a cancer on the body politic.
Sorin Varzaru says
Now, wanna have some real ‘fun”? Google the term………”illegal immingrant released by sanctuary city kills”
Your side is sick, fascinated with murder and death, and really is a cancer on the body politic.
Every policy has unintended bad consequences. Your side opposes red flag laws. When a maniac that would’ve been stripped of his guns by a red flag law kills someone, I can say the EXACT same thing :
“Your side is sick, fascinated with murder and death, and really is a cancer on the body politic.”
I am sure you don’t want morons/crazies killing people with guns, but they do. You resist changes in policy that would prevent some of those deaths, because you think the positives outweigh the negatives (I am assuming). So are Democrats. Sometimes a democrat will do something particularly stupid, like let a illegal criminal free. Sometime a Republican will do the same, let a maniac have his guns. So, I don’t know the answer, it seems like we lost all ability to work together towards a better outcome.
MJM says
Well, I like the idea, and dislike the result. Sounds like anarchy to me. I don’t like the way our legislature is talking about guns, but voters voted them in. My opinion won’t direct me to sit here bull schiffing anyone that I think we need to try to circumvent the law by writing, or making up our own.
I don’t understand how we can direct our County Deputies to work contrary to the laws the State Police enforce. Do we really want to pit those 2 valuable groups against one another ? Where does that lead ?
Either the country is going to evolve in a way that changes gun laws, or it is not. Tides will tell.
Personally, I believe that, if our 2 counties wish to declare our desire to keep gun laws the way they are, then we have our County Supervisors draft a declaration that informs our governor of this. As in voice our opinion loudly. Declare ourselves rogue counties ? Naaah. Sounds like a bull schiff move to me.
Blue Hoss says
No one is going to kill our babies, take our guns or remove our president from office.
Sorin Varzaru says
Blue Hoss, you can keep all your babies when you get pregnant. No one anywhere is telling you to get an abortion. I just hope they don’t accidentally kill themselves or you while playing with your guns.
Blue Hoss says
Funk You!
Sorin Varzaru says
I bow to your debate skills sir or madam. I would use the proper pronoun but you seem to be unwilling to put your name behind your well thought out comments.
Publius Americanus says
Once again, Kate Steinle has nothing to say.
She was murdered by an illegal invader with a gun in sooperheavy gun control Calipoopnia……errr California(so much feces there now it’s getting everwhere-but hey, that’s your kind of place, eh?).
But let’s disarm citizens. Worked out well in Romania, eh Totalitarian?
Sorin Varzaru says
You know who also can’t say anything, the children killed by guns every year in US at a rate 35 TIMES higher then other industrialized nations.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/20/health/child-gun-deaths-rising/index.html
Also the parents shot and killed accidentally by their children
https://www.cbsnews.com/video/2-year-old-accidentally-shoots-kills-mom-in-idaho-walmart/
Children killing each other with weapons left around
https://wtkr.com/2019/06/13/mississippi-boy-accidentally-shoots-kills-12-year-old-sister-while-playing-with-gun/
and so on. But let me guess, you are “pro life”.
>But let’s disarm citizens.
That’s not even the topic. You chose to equate any law designed to reduce gun violence as an attack on your rights, despite the fact that it’s been ruled in courts countless times that reasonable regulation is constitutional.
So, yes, I would like the law enforcement to have a reasonable tool with checks and balances that allows them to remove guns temporarily, with a court order, from someone that shows signs of instability. I would like to make sure people don’t get access to guns without a background check. And so on. It seems most people do, because we voted in office people who are putting these laws in place.