The law enforcement officials in Nevada and elsewhere who are embracing the concept of Second Amendment sanctuaries claim to be protecting citizens’ rights and upholding the Constitution, but they’re dead wrong on both counts.

And as a result, they’re putting people in harm’s way and leaving their counties vulnerable to legal action.

These so-called sanctuaries are counties in a handful of states where sheriffs and other local officials have rejected their duty to uphold gun safety measures passed by state legislatures — primary examples being universal background checks and red flag laws that allow officials to confiscate guns from people who are legally declared to be a threat to themselves or others.

Five Nevada counties — Humboldt, Douglas, Elko, Nye and Lyon — passed sanctuary resolutions this year after state lawmakers approved universal background checks and a red flag law.

Residents of those counties largely cheered the resolutions — the people of Humboldt County even mounted a recall petition when Sheriff Mike Allen bucked the system and announced his department would enforce the red flag law.

But they might not be so happy when the refusal to enforce a state law leads to someone being injured or killed, or results in a gun crime committed with a weapon obtained by someone who shouldn’t have one.

At that point, not only will there be a human cost to the counties’ dereliction of duty, but there could easily be a costly legal case.

That’s because the courts have determined that universal background checks and red flag laws are perfectly legal. The laws have undergone numerous challenges, all of which ended with the measures being upheld.

“So these officials aren’t defending the Constitution, they’re really threatening to defy it and substitute their own personal views of what’s constitutional — and that’s in defiance of a rather robust body of court decisions,” said Eric Tirschwell, a former federal prosecutor who now serves as a director of the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety.

Tirschwell, while participating this past week in a conference call on sanctuary counties, said the movement also was patently undemocratic because it circumvented the will of voters. Nevada is among 24 states whose elected representatives passed gun-safety legislation in recent years.

“Where is this alleged silent majority that many of these county officials and others claim they’re standing up for?” he asked. “Clearly, that majority hasn’t been showing up on Election Day.”

Quite true. Poll after poll shows that Americans support stronger gun laws, including an annual Pew Research Center survey in which the percentage favoring stricter legislation grew from 52% in 2017 to 57% last year to 60% this year.

To their credit, most sheriffs recognize it’s their duty to enforce the laws, including Clark County Sheriff Joe Lombardo.

So far, the sanctuary movement has been almost all talk and no action, with officials merely passing vague resolutions and threatening not to uphold the laws.

But it could already be putting people at risk. It’s easy to imagine people in sanctuary counties being reluctant or afraid to take advantage of the red flag law, for instance, or embolden domestic abusers and other lawbreakers to obtain firearms without a background check.

That’s where the movement is most dangerous and irresponsible. The people who have sworn to protect and serve the public are instead leaving them in extreme danger.

Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford put it well recently in saying: "Laws are presumed to be constitutional, and law enforcement agencies are by definition charged with executing and enforcing the laws of our state. We have a sworn duty to do so until a court instructs us otherwise. If an agency fails to enforce these laws and that results in harm or death, that agency and its agents may be subject to civil liability."

That’s not to say officials can’t oppose tougher gun laws. They most certainly have the right to do so, but abandoning their duty and defying the law isn’t the right way to go about it. Rather, they should go to court, work to elect lawmakers who reflect their views and lobby current leadership to overturn the laws.

That’s upholding the Constitution.