The genius of gun sanctuaries: This is how real Americans defend themselves against the authoritarian Left

By J. D. Heyes

As Left-wing Democrats around the country continue to impose stricter gun control laws on citizens who havenâ€™t done anything wrong and are no threat to the civil society, conservative constitutionalists in more jurisdictions are battling back by implementing â€œgun sanctuaryâ€ policies.

The concept is simple: Within those jurisdictions, federal (and state) laws curbing the Second Amendment rights of citizens wonâ€™t be aggressively enforced.

Conservatives borrowed the tactic from the Democratsâ€™ â€œnullificationâ€ playbook. Left-leaning states in recent years have not only ignored federal laws against the recreational use of marijuana, but they have also violated the Constitution by imposing new, stringent gun control regulations and laws that treat the Second Amendmentâ€™s â€œno infringementâ€ clause like itâ€™s just a suggestion and not a hard-and-fast requirement.

These gun sanctuaries, of course, have infuriated liberal Democrats â€” many of whom support their own â€œsanctuaryâ€ policies prohibiting local police from cooperating with federal immigration authorities in their efforts to remove people in the U.S. illegally.

One of them is Colorado state Attorney General Phil Weiser, who said this week that any sheriff in his state who establishes a gun sanctuary and refuses to enforce any gun confiscation laws â€œshould resign.â€

At issue in Colorado isÂ a new â€œred flagâ€ lawÂ that allows â€œa court to issue confiscatory order[s] empowering police to go to a gun ownerâ€™s home and take away his firearmsâ€ writesÂ Breitbart Newsâ€™Â Awr Hawkins â€” without a hearing involving the gun owner, without a trial, and without the owner ever being charged or convicted of any crime. A simple complaint that said gun owner â€˜may beâ€™ a threat to himself or others is enough to trigger a court to issue a confiscation order, thereby forcing theÂ gun ownerÂ to prove that he or she is â€˜fitâ€™ to continue enjoying his or her rights under the Second Amendment.

No wayÂ thatÂ law would be abused, right?

The fact is, the law turns our founding concept of â€œinnocent until proven guiltyâ€ on its head and itself,Â Â in a perfect world, would be immediately seen as unconstitutional. And letâ€™s face it: This is just a Leftist attempt to take as many guns away from more Americans as possible.

Imagine enacting a â€œred flagâ€ law for the fake news â€œmainstreamâ€ media â€” giving a court the power to silence a media outlet for the mere suggestion that one of its reports could cause harm or injury to a personâ€™s reputation, future employability, or other social standings.

Of course, that wonâ€™t happen with the First Amendment. But when it comes to imposing new restrictions on theÂ SecondAmendment, well, no problem.

Except that it is a problem. Weiserâ€™s opinion that county sheriffs â€œshould resignâ€ if they wonâ€™t enforce a red flag law that some federal court with an activist judge is likely to find acceptable is the epitome of hypocrisy, given that he has no problem with his stateâ€™s recreational marijuana law (in violation of federal law) or illegal alien sanctuary policies, the latter of which actuallyÂ thwartÂ federal immigration law enforcement because they bar police from responding to requests from ICE to detain illegal alien criminals for pick-up.

Weiser said he believes the law will be challenged in court but that the state will ultimately win. When that happens, sheriffs have an obligation to enforce the law.

Many disagree. â€œIf you pass an unconstitutional law, our oaths as commissioners or myself as the sheriff â€” weâ€™re going to follow our constitutional oath first,â€ Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams toldÂ Fox News.

Logan County Sheriff Brett Powell agreed. â€œItâ€™s time we quit trying to put lipstick on a pig and start funding our mental health facilities, instead of trying to take the rights from our people.â€

Democrats cannot have it both ways. They canâ€™t pick and choose which lawsÂ theyÂ want to enforce and ignore, then complain when their political opponents to the same thing. The same is true for the Constitution; Democrats canâ€™t ignore the parts of it they dislike.

A version of this story first appeared at NewsTarget.

Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter â€”Â Click here!