Board adopts Second Amendment resolution - Bonner County Daily Bee: Local News

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
Not you?||
Logout|My Dashboard

Board adopts Second Amendment resolution

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, December 26, 2013 10:00 am

SANDPOINT — Bonner County commissioners unanimously adopted a resolution Tuesday calling on the governor and state lawmakers enhance protections for the right to bear arms.

The resolution is patterned after a resolution the Idaho Republican Party is urging all 44 counties to adopt, but omits language that would direct Bonner County Sheriff Daryl Wheeler to prevent federal action that would violate the Second Amendment.

Commissioners Cary Kelly, Glen Bailey and Mike Nielsen count themselves as strong supporters of the Second Amendment.

“I definitely endorse the Second Amendment,” said Bailey.

However, commissioners said the proposed resolution asked them to do things they can’t legally do, such as directing the sheriff to carry out the board’s wishes.

As a result, the board adopted a resolution which calls upon Gov. C.L. Butch Otter and state lawmakers to enact a statute that makes it a felony offense for a governmental authority to intentionally and knowingly violate rights protected under the Second Amendment.

The Bonner County resolution strongly supports the spirit of the GOP resolution’s intent.

“That’s what we’ve given here in what we feel is the best manner, which is to kick it up to the state legislature and to the state of Idaho to take appropriate action,” said Kelly, the board’s chairman.

Wheeler did not attend Tuesday’s commission board meeting, but has also been a vocal supporter of protecting citizens’ rights to possess guns.

Along with lacking authority to direct the sheriff, Nielsen said Idaho law limits counties’ authority.

“This, I think, was the best compromise that we could come up with,” said Nielsen.

More about

More about

More about

  • Discuss

Welcome to the discussion.

40 comments:

  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 6:33 pm on Thu, Jan 2, 2014.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Really, Scott. Is what I said not true. Didn't Obama sign a law that permits people to carry guns in National Parks?

    So what's unbelievable. Facts are facts.

     
  • reddawn posted at 1:08 pm on Thu, Jan 2, 2014.

    reddawn Posts: 1698

    As a Democrat and gun owner, I have never believed that the second amendment was in danger in any way. It is only the intent of the FEAR BASE CULT that has made you believe that. Yet Americans by an overwhelming amount want back ground checks for every gun owner. I had a Man tell me no way I had a DUI and they will take it away from me. WHAT! That was years ago when you were a kid. He said they still will not let me own a gun. WHAT, just another FEAR GAME. I would have to say those folks who are member's of the NRA all go threw back ground checks, learn more about how to use a gun, America wants back ground checks how that worken for ya. They sure don't here what America wants. The commissioner's need to start doing the job they are voted in to do. This is not one of them, or is it changing the land that belongs to the Feds that we all use. or is it there right to tell us we cant smoke. They are so busy conjuring up your Republican garbage they are spending money on things that are against the law and then telling us if it snows we don't have the money for blowing. If they were doing the jobs we voted for the remodel of the court house would have not happened. They are so lost in politics they are not doing the job they are suppose to be doing.

     
  • Scott S posted at 9:11 am on Thu, Jan 2, 2014.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    What Bob said: "All the Obama Adm has done is allow people to carry guns in National Parks. Why didn't Bush do that?"
    You are unbelievable Bob

    Here is what I posted previously at 4:34 pm on 12-26-2013.
    "Bob, you are without a doubt the consumate BS spin artist. Anyone who has read any of your posts knows that you do not agree with the amendment to section 512 of public law 111-24 and that includes the post a while back where you stated that the 2nd Amendment should be repealed.
    Thank God there are people like this guy around.

    Dr. Tom Coburn, R, Oklahoma
    http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=accomplishments

    "Protecting the Rights of Law Abiding Americans to Protect Themselves and Their Families
    Dr. Coburn has consistently fought to ensure the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is not infringed upon. When federal bureaucrats and unelected judges restricted the Second Amendment in national parks, Dr. Coburn authored a provision of law [Section 512 of Public Law 111-24] to reaffirm the right of law abiding Americans to carry firearms to protect themselves and their families when visiting national parks. When Congress sought to pass a bill that threatened to unfairly deny some veterans the right to bear arms, Dr. Coburn successfully fought to make changes to the bill to ensure that the rights these vets fought and sacrificed for would not be denied to them." "


     
  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 6:54 pm on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Lily, the 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere. I just don't understand what everyone is worried about. What do you use after belts and suspenders?

    All the Obama Adm has done is allow people to carry guns in National Parks. Why didn't Bush do that?

     
  • Lily posted at 6:20 pm on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    Lily Posts: 114

    I would like to thank the Bonner County Commissioners for supporting our Second Amendment. We all have the right to protect ourselves from intruders in our home, and whatever weapon I choose to use for that purpose is none of your business. I have a concealed carry permit, my guns are registered, and I've never committed a violent crime. What's your problem, lefties?
    Signed, An American Patriot!

     
  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 11:50 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Your kidding, aren't you, Patriot.

    I'm told that anyone who needs to call himself a patriot probably doesn't understand the meaning of the word.

    Happy New Year!

     
  • sandpoint patriot posted at 11:11 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    sandpoint patriot Posts: 2

    The county commission has done the right thing here where YOUR RIGHTS and FREEDOMS are concerned. Sounds like they need to do a bunch more as well. Be glad they did this and not attempting to strip you of your guns and land, fuel and ability to do as you please on your land as they are in other counties right now. Lets keep these guys honest and straight and move forward as a people who want and need their liberties and freedoms as defined in the constitution.

     
  • sandpoint patriot posted at 11:04 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    sandpoint patriot Posts: 2

    Bob Wynhausen.... what is wrong with some of you people? Are you even AMERICAN anymore? Who are you people?! You've been so brainwashed and desensitized to the socialist agenda.

    MARK TWAIN:
    The nation is divided, half patriots and half traitors, and no man can tell which from which.

    Lets talk about the cold hard facts for a moment and ponder the words of some of the greatest leaders to walk on the American Continent

    • Governments murdered four times as many civilians as were
    killed in all the international and domestic wars combined.

    • Governments murdered millions more people than were killed by
    common criminals.

    How could governments kill so many people?

    The governments had the power - and the people, the victims, were
    unable to resist. The victims were unarmed.

    Turkey 1915 - 1917 1 - 1.5 million Armenians (mostly Christians)
    were rounded up and executed a few years after the Government banned
    ownership of firearms but only after a National Firearms Registration
    was complete and firearms were confiscated.


    1929 – 1945 Soviet Union - 20 Million Citizens were rounded up and
    Executed within years of a National Firearms Registration eventually
    leading to a complete firearms ban and then total confiscation.

    1933 -1945 Nazi Germany and Occupied Europe - 20 Million Citizens,
    mainly Jews, gypsies, political opponents and critics were rounded up
    and executed after various national firearms registrations were
    implemented leading to a complete firearms ban and then total
    confiscation.

    1927 – 1949 China, Nationalist - 10 million Citizens, mainly army
    conscripts were rounded up after a system of firearms registration
    was implemented leading to a complete firearms ban.

    1949 -1952 / 1957 – 1960 / 1966 – Red China –1976 20 – 35 Million
    political opponents, enemies of the state( citizens) were rounded
    up , executed or imprisoned for "resisting any government program"
    and for supplying guns to such " criminals".

    1960 – 1981 Guatemala -100,000 – 200,000 Mayans and Indians/
    political enemies were rounded up and executed after a National Gun
    registry was implemented leading to confiscation.

    1971 – 1979 Uganda - 300,000 Christians ( political enemies) were
    rounded up and executed after a National firearms registry was
    implemented leading to confiscation.

    1975 – 1979 Cambodia - 2 million educated persons( political enemies)
    were rounded up and executed after a national firearms registry was
    implemented leading to confiscation.

    1994 Rwanda - 800,000 citizens were rounded up and executed after a
    national firearms registry was implemented leading to confiscation

    2000 Canada – A national firearms registry was implemented. The
    current Liberal party is proposing that if elected they will begin a
    firearms ban on various types of firearms including handguns and
    various types of rifles. If the ban is implemented, obviously
    citizens owning those types of firearms would no longer be permitted
    to have them and they would be confiscated. And so it begins…

    Is ANYONE seeing a clear and present pattern here?? This is ONLY
    during the last century ALONE.... Lets see what the founding fathers
    said about it...

    Here are some MUST READ quotes from the founding fathers, tyrants,
    historical figures and world leaders surrounding the issue of firearm
    ownership. Many people now days would argue that the founding fathers
    believed strongly in firearms ownership because it was a different
    day and time and the world is not like that anymore.... those people
    havent read about the events posted above which have happened in
    modern times..... Men have not changed from the begining of time,
    only their toys.


    "It was a basic principle of a tyrant " to unarm his people of
    weapons, money, and all means whereby they resist his power."
    Sir Walter Raleigh (1554 - 1618)

    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are
    neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make
    things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they
    serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed
    man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man." -
    Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria.

    "...Arms like laws discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer
    in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The
    balance of power is the scale of peace." -Thomas Paine

    "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be
    reasonable to shoot back with your own gun."
    The Dalai Lama (May 15, 2001, The Seattle Times), speaking at
    the "Educating Heart Summit" in Portland, Oregon, when asked by a
    girl how to react when a shooter takes aim at a classmate

    "To disarm the people (is) the best and most effectual way to enslave
    them..." -George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380.

    "A free people ought... to be armed" and "When firearms go, all goes -
    -we need them every hour" George Washington, 1790

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas
    Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334
    (C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950)

    "The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on
    the other hand, arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and
    the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as
    property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world
    destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not,
    others dare not lay them aside...Horrid mischief would ensue were one
    half the world deprived of the use of them..." Thomas Paine

     
  • Scott S posted at 8:12 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    RD, do not go down that road.... Jim Stoicheff was my 8th grade teacher and principal at Southside School and I actually liked him, you know of Jim Stoicheff correct?? Back then the democrats were a different breed than what they are now.

     
  • kathleenhellhole posted at 7:54 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    kathleenhellhole Posts: 4

    You finally got one thing right, I do fear this government we have. Neither party in power is worth their salt. They lie. They don't represent the constituients. They are bought and paid for by big corporations. Follow the money trail. If you are so naive as to believe this government will never disarm the people you are just one part of the problem we face today. As for background checks...do you think/believe criminals and/or gang members are going to get a back ground check trying to legally purchase a gun? Duh! As for equal pay for equal work regarding women...there is no arguement there. I have been doing what was considered a "man's job" for 32+ years and yes I have gotten the same pay in part to unionization. As for the "choice" of killing an innocent, unborn child because of rape...well if a woman was allowed to defend herself with a fire arm maybe she would not get raped. Conception can be prevented these days or are you so sheltered as not to know this. Do a little research on what happened to the survivors of Katrina...martial law was instituted and yes many citizens had their fire arms confiscated. I also lived through the first Watts riot in the 1960s. All sorts of fire arms were flying off the shelves to law abiding citizens wishing to protect themselves and their families. What good would a back ground check and wait period do at times like this? Criminals are just going to steal what they need from the unarmed. It would not take much for government to declare martial law and then those with registered fire arms can be visited for confiscation. Maybe you should try living on the border of the US and Mexico for a while...remember "fast and furious" and I don'tean the movie, where our government allowed fire arms into the hands of criminals and lost track of them. The guns come back over here and add more reason for banning guns because of criminal use of them.

     
  • kathleenhellhole posted at 7:26 am on Tue, Dec 31, 2013.

    kathleenhellhole Posts: 4

    Well Bob, maybe you should read the NDAA which includes anyone that has more than 7 days supply of food in their home or owns a fire arm can be considered a terrorist. No "threat" in registering fire arms or automobiles, okay. But it is only the law abiding citizen that will comply with registering so how does this really stop the criminal nut-job. In CA there is the constant occurence of persons that don't get a driver's license, insurance or registration. They cause an vehicular accident and the worst they get is deported only to return in a week...which I might add is breaking another law with illegal entry. Making the law abiding citizen abide by more laws will never stop the criminal...they don't care about laws! As for a waiting period of 10 days...so much for the person that is threatened with bodily harm being able to defend oneself...wait 10 days and hope the criminal will give you that much time.

     
  • reddawn posted at 4:08 pm on Mon, Dec 30, 2013.

    reddawn Posts: 1698

    Scott, As a local women, and family since 1923 maybe it is you that needs to move to the South where you would fit right in, local girl did you inherit family money, I didn't I had to buy my own. as far as freedom I do own a gun in fact several, and in this state we pay plenty in property taxes, it those darn Republicans that tax us income tax, like slave labor, increase property taxes to pay for a remodel of the old court house, and break the law and take it from the road and bridge fund, so I will take the Democrat way anytime, I wouldn't have made such a crack head move, or would I do my best to destroy small business, and I would have done everything to keep buck knifes here in Sandpoint and not lose it to Post Falls. Free speech is fine, it is when you lie like the tea party has and the republican party that is not free to lie, there is a difference.

     
  • localgirl posted at 10:43 am on Mon, Dec 30, 2013.

    localgirl Posts: 136

    Ah politics...the only place where the participants actually think it makes sense that liberals promote freedom (except the freedom to speak, and bear arms, and keep the money you earn and the property you own) and conservatives promote freedom (except the freedom to marry who you want, and worship how you please, and control your own body).

    Makes perfect sense!

     
  • Scott S posted at 5:53 pm on Sun, Dec 29, 2013.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    Hey Bob! I do believe you need to move back to California. It is more suited to you. Ill help you pack. Reddawn, I think you should share in the U-Haul rental truck.

     
  • reddawn posted at 12:10 pm on Sun, Dec 29, 2013.

    reddawn Posts: 1698

    Kathleen, You are a fine example of FEAR. This government is not going to take your guns away from you. Background checks are a very good move, even the NRA in years past agreed with it. Or is it you have family who wouldn't pass back ground checks or yourself. As far as a women's rights , they should be paid the same as a Man for the same job. As far as abortion I believe a women has the right to make a choice in a reasonable time line, rape of any kind, or death of a women. It has been this way for years, yet you all think you are God, you are not, and for some reason you think that Men don't have a lot to do with women getting abortions. They are the main reason. Then you turn around and want to cut off the children that are born into poor families and help support them. you are such a hypocrite. Abortion has been going on for ever, it was done in the back doors for centuries. In fact we have thousands of kids needing a family why don't you adopt one.

     
  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 11:59 am on Sun, Dec 29, 2013.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Kathleen, what is the threat of registering guns or magazines? We register our automobiles with threatening consequences. What's the difference?

    As for California, they have a waiting period between purchase and possession of a handgun which is currently 10 days, but has been as high as 15. In terms of gun deaths per 100,000 of population, California doesn't make the top 20, but Idaho does.

    http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-per-100000/

     
  • kathleenhellhole posted at 8:52 am on Sun, Dec 29, 2013.

    kathleenhellhole Posts: 4

    WOW! It appears to me there are only a couple sensible people posting to this article. You north Idahoans live in an area that has a "shall issue" for CCW and you seem to take that for granted. In Cali you must prove your life is in danger or carry large sums of money to get a CCW. That does no good for the average person that happens to get mugged or shot just sitting in their car... It also does no good for the woman (or man but less likely) that separates from an abusive spouse. She is told to get a "restraining order" like that will prevent her from being shot, stabbed, straggled or otherwise made dead. You just don't know what you have until it is gone. I read the article link that "ski2work" posted. Did anyone else read it? Connecticut guns owners having to register their firearems and high capacity magazines. Again it is only the law abiding citizen that will comply with this. This just gives the government a list of people to visit at a later date when guns are banned. Gun control is a farce unless you mean being able to hit your target. It is a fact that when criminals know you are unarmed they are free to do as they please. For those that talk about helping the returning veterans...in case you have not heard it is the returning vet that certain politicians wish to disarm... To Jenny, I read nothing in the article about "heavy artillery" but maybe you should check out what other states want to call "assault weapons"...anything that is semiauto suddenly is an assualt weapon. As for "reddawn" you are so out in left field you are not even in the park on that one. When you speak of "right to take care our bodies" I can only assume you mean abortion and/or "choice". Must mean you think taking the life of an unborn child is ok if it is done by a doctor but why is it that when a pregnant woman is killed or injured and the fetus dies courts charge that as murder too? But this is another issue entirely.

     
  • Jenny posted at 11:53 pm on Sat, Dec 28, 2013.

    Jenny Posts: 120

    Yes, I am a 5th generation Sanpointian from North Idaho.
    Let's just blast everyone with these gun laws.
    I also believe in the Second Amendment but let's not
    push this thing into HEAVY artillery.

     
  • reddawn posted at 6:33 pm on Sat, Dec 28, 2013.

    reddawn Posts: 1698

    I would like to know what rights have been taken from us. The only ones I know of is the Tea party taking voting rights away from us. Not paying women the same in the same job, taking our right to love who we want, taking our right to take care of our own bodies, I have not seen one right taken away when it comes to guns, but mine. When I don't want to sit in a restaurants and shop with some nut case who seems to have a need to show his gun off, I will go to the shops that say No guns allowed.

     
  • kathleenhellhole posted at 4:03 pm on Sat, Dec 28, 2013.

    kathleenhellhole Posts: 4

    You all should be happy you live in a state that tries to protect your Second Amendment rights...try living in California where it is just the opposite. Yes, the Fourth Amendment is in big trouble now also but perhaps our founding fathers put these rights in according to order of importance. Free Speech to be able to make our voices heard. The right to keep and bear arms to provide protection of the First and other eight. Beware, big government just might like to quarter soldiers in your home some day...to keep an eye on us. Limit searches and seizures again enforced by the Second. Your commissioners did not address all the problems but at least they are working on a big one...too many of our rights have been lost and freely given up in the name of security. When guns are out lawed only out laws will have guns.

     
  • Here's What I Say posted at 9:58 am on Sat, Dec 28, 2013.

    Here's What I Say Posts: 1240

    So you think it's a "natural right" to own a gun? Is that why you criticize Bob?

     
  • Ruby Ridge posted at 9:20 am on Sat, Dec 28, 2013.

    Ruby Ridge Posts: 72

    We have a bigger problem protecting The Fourth Amendment, than guns at this time. Obviously they took on a easier problem instead of dealing with a real problem. What's their next big agenda, white shoes after Labor Day.

     
  • Colin Cox posted at 2:11 pm on Fri, Dec 27, 2013.

    Colin Cox Posts: 62

    Great, for their next trick maybe they can reaffirm the law of gravity.

     
  • tony Anthnoy posted at 8:24 am on Fri, Dec 27, 2013.

    tony Anthnoy Posts: 42

    How about getting the vets some work, mental health coverage, and social support. They were good enough to give their lives or limbs, but not to be cared for when they return?

     
  • tony Anthnoy posted at 8:22 am on Fri, Dec 27, 2013.

    tony Anthnoy Posts: 42

    What a waste of frickin' time for a useless bunch of bureaucrats. Would you mind spending your time on unemployment and supporting our troops who have returned!

     
  • bethfallen posted at 7:25 am on Fri, Dec 27, 2013.

    bethfallen Posts: 1

    Just what we need: more reinforcement to get more guns into the scene and consequently more mass shootings. Why do the Sandpoint Commissionsers focus on putting more guns out their for the precious right wingers when they should be focusing on gun control?

     
  • ski2work posted at 10:43 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    ski2work Posts: 622

    Unreasonable search and seizure? When we allow this to happen in our state, you can best believe they will come to your home to confiscate at a later date - http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/26/connecticut-gun-owners-wait-in-line-to-do-something-many-gun-owners-hope-they-never-have-to/

     
  • steve-o posted at 10:31 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    steve-o Posts: 44

    While our magnanimous county commissioners are at it, why don't they also pass a resolution calling upon Gov. Otter and state lawmakers to enact a statute to support the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches and seizures, especially when it comes to the NSA and CIA!

    "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

     
  • flytime posted at 7:42 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    flytime Posts: 44

    It is coming on to the political season. Am I wrong or does this resolution feel like pandering to the right wing faction of the republican party?

     
  • Scott S posted at 6:20 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    I do not disagree Bob, see there Richard I can agree on something[wink] I can agree that the Obama Adm if they thought they could get away with it, would most certainly put a crimp in gun rights.

     
  • Scott S posted at 6:18 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    Richard, that is no different than a left wing extremist agreeing or disagreeing on anything. I am sure that you read my post that talked about the fact that all of the postings on here will never change anyones mind. I was merely pointing out that Bob tried to put a spin on something where he has no credibility in doing so.

     
  • RichardD posted at 5:24 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    RichardD Posts: 2638

    Good luck getting a right wing extremist to agree or disagree on anything.

     
  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 4:43 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Scott, I was simply pointing out its passage, not whether I liked it. Do you disagree that the Obama Adm has done nothing to take away anyone's gun rights?

     
  • Scott S posted at 4:34 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Scott S Posts: 358

    Bob, you are without a doubt the consumate BS spin artist. Anyone who has read any of your posts knows that you do not agree with the amendment to section 512 of public law 111-24 and that includes the post a while back where you stated that the 2nd Amendment should be repealed.
    Thank God there are people like this guy around.

    Dr. Tom Coburn, R, Oklahoma
    http://www.coburn.senate.gov/public/?p=accomplishments

    "Protecting the Rights of Law Abiding Americans to Protect Themselves and Their Families
    Dr. Coburn has consistently fought to ensure the right to bear arms guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution is not infringed upon. When federal bureaucrats and unelected judges restricted the Second Amendment in national parks, Dr. Coburn authored a provision of law [Section 512 of Public Law 111-24] to reaffirm the right of law abiding Americans to carry firearms to protect themselves and their families when visiting national parks. When Congress sought to pass a bill that threatened to unfairly deny some veterans the right to bear arms, Dr. Coburn successfully fought to make changes to the bill to ensure that the rights these vets fought and sacrificed for would not be denied to them."

     
  • Bonner County Taxpayer posted at 3:01 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Bonner County Taxpayer Posts: 11

    Too bad the county commission isn't as good at addressing real problems as it is with imaginary ones.

     
  • BeerBilly posted at 2:54 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    BeerBilly Posts: 1

    I support gun rights, but this is pathetic. What good is it to have gun rights when we are losing our freedoms through other means. The banks are taking our houses and savings, student debt is stealing our future, and the government spies know everything about us. And you think being able to own a six-shooter is going to matter to the military/police who enforce the current laws?

     
  • RichardD posted at 2:24 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    RichardD Posts: 2638

    More extremism from paranoid right wing fanatics.

     
  • Here's What I Say posted at 12:20 pm on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Here's What I Say Posts: 1240

    The states have no vote that can regulate federal laws. States have the right to regulate that which is not in the federal rights to regulate. States can only look foolish chewing their gums with their teeth removed. The county can't regulate the state either. Who elected these fools in office that have no awareness of the laws? They are drumming the ALEC drum of right wing extremists...and that makes them look dangerous to people with moderate views of government and law. People also know that juries can state that a law is unjust and unfair and use it not to convict a person arrested by some stupid law.

     
  • LawrenceFury posted at 11:00 am on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    LawrenceFury Posts: 696

    What a pant load of crap. This is the same nonsense that led to the Civil War. The commissioners have allot of things better to do than this overt political extremism.

     
  • Bob Wynhausen posted at 10:57 am on Thu, Dec 26, 2013.

    Bob Wynhausen Posts: 9028

    Is this the resolution that begins, "WHEREAS, The United States Constitution prohibits any infringement of the Natural and Pre-existing right to keep and bear arms;"

    Really? Natural and pre-existing right? Really?

    I understand political pressure and I understand elections, which is what this is all about. What I don't understand is how the 2nd Amendment has been threatened by the federal government. As a matter of fact, since Obama has been president, all we've done is expand the right to bear arms. (PL 111-24)

    Finally, I wonder who makes the determination that a federal action violates the 2nd Amendment?