Illinois doesn’t care about the rule of law. Its political leaders only care about the laws they like and screw the rest of them.

That’s the only thing an individual can really infer from the latest move coming from the state. You see, while Illinois has sanctuary cities in the state–some argue Illinois as a whole is a sanctuary–and have done nothing to combat that, Illinois lawmakers are aiming at counties that are taking a stand against gun control.

An Illinois lawmaker wants to make sure local governments don’t try to flout state gun laws, symbolically or otherwise. The measure comes after dozens of Illinois counties last year passed largely symbolic “gun sanctuary” ordinances that promised not to enforce unconstitutional gun laws. Freshman state Rep. Terra Costa Howard, D-Glen Ellyn, filed House Bill 3553, which prohibits local governments from passing any ordinance restricting enforcement of any state gun law. Williamson County’s State’s Attorney recently said he wouldn’t charge otherwise law-abiding citizens for violating any possible statewide ban on certain guns. And 26 of Illinois’ 102 counties, mainly in rural areas of the state, passed nonbinding resolutions that either said they wouldn’t enforce unconstitutional gun laws or that they didn’t support specific bills that were being considered in Springfield. Illinois State Rifle Association’s Richard Pearson said some politicians in Illinois don’t understand the significance of the Second Amendment. … Pearson said Costa Howard’s bill is a home rule issue and that there’s real opposition to her measure and other gun-control bills.

I understand how Pearson feels, and his with the Illinois State Rifle Association to fight this every step of the way is not only laudable but necessary. No state should be able to pass gun control laws without staunch opposition. Ever.

However, I keep coming back to the point I’ve made more than once today alone. Namely that there was no urgency in making sure laws were enforced when it came to immigration, so why should we care about anti-gunners’ vehemence on the Second Amendment? Why?

You either support the rule of law or you don’t. Period.

“Oh, but they’re ignoring the rule of law themselves,” someone will counter.

The problem, however, is the precedence. We’ve already seen progressive cities ignore immigration laws with no repercussions. Hell, we’re watching Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto push for gun control in his city despite a state preemption law explicitly designed to prevent communities from doing that. We’ve watched the law be ignored for a while now.

Frankly, we’re tired of playing with a handicap.

The Second Amendment is part of the United States Constitution. It explicitly says that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. That means it’s more than a disagreement over the interpretation of something not explicitly spelled out, like immigration. Nope. It’s a direct violation of an explicit constitutional principle.

So yeah, Second Amendment advocates are going to latch onto liberal precedence when it suits them. That’s how you get sanctuary cities for guns whether you like it or not.

When anti-gunners lash out at gun sanctuary communities while ignoring others, they’re showing that they don’t care about the law. They only care about progressive laws.