• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Second Amendment Sanctuary Movement Spreads To Kentucky

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
The Attorney General is wrong.

The counties have every authority to nullify state and federal gun laws.

Its called the 2A , binding on the fed and states and the law of the land.
Attorney General? I didn't see anything about him in that story. The story mentions that the Marshall COUNTY ATTORNEY thinks this is a bad idea. He is the man that will have to defend the county against any lawsuits over this. If your attorney doesn't believe in your case you may have difficulty winning in court. Oh, well, everybody wants it. When it goes south, I am sure all of those county residents will be glad to chip in to pay for the lawsuit, right?
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
Attorney General? I didn't see anything about him in that story. The story mentions that the Marshall COUNTY ATTORNEY thinks this is a bad idea. He is the man that will have to defend the county against any lawsuits over this. If your attorney doesn't believe in your case you may have difficulty winning in court. Oh, well, everybody wants it. When it goes south, I am sure all of those county residents will be glad to chip in to pay for the lawsuit, right?
I stand corrected on the typo.

County Attorney. Hes still wrong.

Why are you of all people against kentuckians standing up for their RTKABA?
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
I stand corrected on the typo.

County Attorney. Hes still wrong.

Why are you of all people against kentuckians standing up for their RTKABA?
I am not against anyone "standing up for their RTKABA". Please show where I have said that. I am in favor of more people actively involving themselves in "standing up for their RTKABA". That doesn't mean that I will get behind any and every scheme that is proposed. I don't know what these laws say or do. As with most things, including your last post, the devil is in the details. The fact that the Marshall Co. Attorney is opposed is troubling. Why is he opposed? Where is this thing going next? Does nobody expect any organized opposition by "Moms demand action". You can count on lawsuits and when that happens, every word of these "sanctuary ordinances" is going to be examined by a judge. Will these hastily written ordinances stand that kind of scrutiny? Of course, the anti-gunners will select the poorest county that is least able to afford any legal help and sue them first. Judges will not be very likely to be accepting of a COUNTY ordinance that limits a STATE Judge on how he can rule on a STATE law. I don't even know how that is supposed to work. It looks like it could help me a lot in the kind of work I do, but is it constitutional? Who knows. It may be years before any of us know the answer.

Right now, it looks like this is something that is going to pass no matter if they are legal or not. This train has some steam on it and won't be stopped anytime soon. I am not sure how they will look in six months. There is a lot of action in most counties. Get back to me when Jefferson and Fayette Cos. pass them.

I just had a conversation with my County Sheriff about this subject and his reaction was that he didn't need anything like this. He said that he swore an oath and no law was going to change that oath or the constitution and he would obey both of them. Now whether he agrees with you on anything, I don't know. I kind of doubt it. It seems that there are about 100,000 people that want these things and from what I see on Facebook, they have 100,000 different ideas of what the constitution says and what these laws will actually do. There could be 99,999 people disappointed at the outcome of this and all of them are armed and pissed off right now. Looks like a mess to me, glad I don't have to clean it up.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
I am not against anyone "standing up for their RTKABA". Please show where I have said that. I am in favor of more people actively involving themselves in "standing up for their RTKABA". That doesn't mean that I will get behind any and every scheme that is proposed. I don't know what these laws say or do. As with most things, including your last post, the devil is in the details. The fact that the Marshall Co. Attorney is opposed is troubling. Why is he opposed? Where is this thing going next? Does nobody expect any organized opposition by "Moms demand action". You can count on lawsuits and when that happens, every word of these "sanctuary ordinances" is going to be examined by a judge. Will these hastily written ordinances stand that kind of scrutiny? Of course, the anti-gunners will select the poorest county that is least able to afford any legal help and sue them first. Judges will not be very likely to be accepting of a COUNTY ordinance that limits a STATE Judge on how he can rule on a STATE law. I don't even know how that is supposed to work. It looks like it could help me a lot in the kind of work I do, but is it constitutional? Who knows. It may be years before any of us know the answer.

Right now, it looks like this is something that is going to pass no matter if they are legal or not. This train has some steam on it and won't be stopped anytime soon. I am not sure how they will look in six months. There is a lot of action in most counties. Get back to me when Jefferson and Fayette Cos. pass them.

I just had a conversation with my County Sheriff about this subject and his reaction was that he didn't need anything like this. He said that he swore an oath and no law was going to change that oath or the constitution and he would obey both of them. Now whether he agrees with you on anything, I don't know. I kind of doubt it. It seems that there are about 100,000 people that want these things and from what I see on Facebook, they have 100,000 different ideas of what the constitution says and what these laws will actually do. There could be 99,999 people disappointed at the outcome of this and all of them are armed and pissed off right now. Looks like a mess to me, glad I don't have to clean it up.
Declaring entire counties as off limits to gun control has nothing to do with courts, or judges , or even sheriffs.

It puts the gov on notice that they can pass what they wish then go pound sand . There will be no compliance.

Now. How many counties will do this because Andy got elected I dont know.

Ky has always been gun friendly and the state gov has always realized it can do little as far as gun regulation and get by with it.
The ky constitution doesn't allow them the authority to do anything but deny concealed carry. And that was in large part ignored when it tried that in the past.

Do I think we really need to proclaim again what the legislature already knows? Probably not.

But it's a plain statement to gov that the end of their rope gun control wise has already been reached. That is never a bad thing.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,246
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Let me just add something.

4 U.S.C. §101
Every member of a State legislature, and every executive and judicial officer of a State, shall, before he proceeds to execute the duties of his office, take an oath in the following form, to wit: “I, A B, do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States.”
Federal law requires the states actors to take an oath to support the second amendment.

Yous Guys can take it from here....
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
Let me just add something.



Federal law requires the states actors to take an oath to support the second amendment.

Yous Guys can take it from here....
But nobody has ever defined what that means. I know dozens of people that say, "I support the 2nd Amendment, but...." Who decides if you are really doing that and what it really means? When it comes to lawsuits over this, it will be the courts. What happens when they decide that it means just exactly what we have been doing all along?

Does that mean that the state law that prohibits guns in schools is suddenly and immediately repealed? Does it mean that there can be no background checks done at gun stores during a transfer? Does it mean that a store owner can no longer post "No Guns" signs on their business? Does this mean that the NFA is now gone? If the answers to any of these questions is no, I suspect that a lot of the people pushing for "Sanctuary Counties" will be surprised and very disappointed. What comes next when they find out that they didn't get what they wanted (expected)? What happens when they find out they have been double-crossed? Everybody wants these Scantuary ordinances passed but nobody knows what they actually do, what their limits are. The expectations are very high according to what I am reading posted in various places.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
But nobody has ever defined what that means. I know dozens of people that say, "I support the 2nd Amendment, but...." Who decides if you are really doing that and what it really means? When it comes to lawsuits over this, it will be the courts. What happens when they decide that it means just exactly what we have been doing all along?

Does that mean that the state law that prohibits guns in schools is suddenly and immediately repealed? Does it mean that there can be no background checks done at gun stores during a transfer? Does it mean that a store owner can no longer post "No Guns" signs on their business? Does this mean that the NFA is now gone? If the answers to any of these questions is no, I suspect that a lot of the people pushing for "Sanctuary Counties" will be surprised and very disappointed. What comes next when they find out that they didn't get what they wanted (expected)? What happens when they find out they have been double-crossed? Everybody wants these Scantuary ordinances passed but nobody knows what they actually do, what their limits are. The expectations are very high according to what I am reading posted in various places.
The 2A is one clear sentence.

Only anti gun people play the " what does it mean game.

A 10 yr old can read it and know what it says.

The founders decided what it meant and put it in clear concise writing. The 2A doesn't grant the RTKABA only protects it . What some robe decides the 2A means is irrelevant.

In addition why do you think the people who vote entire counties as 2a sanctuaries in opposition to gov overreach care about or will comply with a court decision that sanctions it.?

If voting and courts could have upheld the RTKABA they would have by now.

This isnt about courts anymore. It's about Americans standing up for their RTKABA.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
What do you expect will be the consequence of that?
I can't tell the future. But the whole idea of sanctuary counties is to put gov and its agents on notice that the peo peo people in those county's will not comply with having their rights stolen by decree.
And that the officials pushing such tyranny days in office are numbered.

How far gov officials are stupid enough to push against that is their choice.

As I stated before. I don't think sanctuary counties are really nessacary in Ky. The state legislature already knows gun regulation is in violation of the ky constitution, and 2a. As well as the fact it wont be complied with and political heads will roll except in the two liberal counties in the state.

But the stand by kentuckians to give clear notice of that fact is IMO a good idea. And now is the time to do so instead of after the fact as in VA.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
So, if your local County Sheriff sees a person he knows to be a convicted felon and that person is carrying a gun, can the Sheriff arrest that person and the Sheriff not be in violation of the county Sanctuary Ordinance? What about a person carrying a gun on school property? What about an unregistered machinegun? What about the State Police? If they arrest a man for one of these crimes can the county jailer take that prisoner into custody and not violate the ordinance? What if a person is sentenced to jail for one of these crimes, can the Judge then be charged for violating the ordinance? Who charges them? Who arrests them? Who would arrest the Sheriff if he violates the law? Does this "statement" by the people have any teeth in it? If it doesn't have any teeth, what does that say about the "statement by the people"? Without knowing the answers to these things (and many more) how can anybody decide whether or not to support these things? Here on this forum we dissect proposed laws word by word to determine what they mean and what will be the probable outcome of them. There seems to be a rush to support these ordinance without any scrutiny at all. If I am wrong and there has been scrutiny please let me know what they accomplish.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,246
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
But nobody has ever defined what that means. I know dozens of people that say, "I support the 2nd Amendment, but...." Who decides if you are really doing that and what it really means? When it comes to lawsuits over this, it will be the courts. What happens when they decide that it means just exactly what we have been doing all along?

Does that mean that the state law that prohibits guns in schools is suddenly and immediately repealed? Does it mean that there can be no background checks done at gun stores during a transfer? Does it mean that a store owner can no longer post "No Guns" signs on their business? Does this mean that the NFA is now gone? If the answers to any of these questions is no, I suspect that a lot of the people pushing for "Sanctuary Counties" will be surprised and very disappointed. What comes next when they find out that they didn't get what they wanted (expected)? What happens when they find out they have been double-crossed? Everybody wants these Scantuary ordinances passed but nobody knows what they actually do, what their limits are. The expectations are very high according to what I am reading posted in various places.
"If the answers to any of these questions is no..." You presented alphabet soup as though it is one subject. It's not. NFA is unconstitutional because the gov. cannot interfere with the peoples' rights to posses firearms in any way. And that has nothing to do with felons.
Stores open to the public depends on state law in regards to trespass and how it is applied. Stores open to the public operate at the pleasure of the state.
Background checks would be unconstitutional, NFA unconstitutional.
Schools are government controlled, but schools are really locally controlled. It is a sticky wicket.

All the USSC has ever really said about guns are about guns in sensitive places, like courts and prisons, may be regulated. But that has never been set in stone.

Holding an official accountable to their oath is enforceable.
 

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
"If the answers to any of these questions is no..." You presented alphabet soup as though it is one subject. It's not. NFA is unconstitutional because the gov. cannot interfere with the peoples' rights to posses firearms in any way. And that has nothing to do with felons.
Stores open to the public depends on state law in regards to trespass and how it is applied. Stores open to the public operate at the pleasure of the state.
Background checks would be unconstitutional, NFA unconstitutional.
Schools are government controlled, but schools are really locally controlled. It is a sticky wicket.

All the USSC has ever really said about guns are about guns in sensitive places, like courts and prisons, may be regulated. But that has never been set in stone.

Holding an official accountable to their oath is enforceable.
How and by whom, specifically?
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
So, if your local County Sheriff sees a person he knows to be a convicted felon and that person is carrying a gun, can the Sheriff arrest that person and the Sheriff not be in violation of the county Sanctuary Ordinance? What about a person carrying a gun on school property? What about an unregistered machinegun? What about the State Police? If they arrest a man for one of these crimes can the county jailer take that prisoner into custody and not violate the ordinance? What if a person is sentenced to jail for one of these crimes, can the Judge then be charged for violating the ordinance? Who charges them? Who arrests them? Who would arrest the Sheriff if he violates the law? Does this "statement" by the people have any teeth in it? If it doesn't have any teeth, what does that say about the "statement by the people"? Without knowing the answers to these things (and many more) how can anybody decide whether or not to support these things? Here on this forum we dissect proposed laws word by word to determine what they mean and what will be the probable outcome of them. There seems to be a rush to support these ordinance without any scrutiny at all. If I am wrong and there has been scrutiny please let me know what they accomplish.
The answer to all those questions would no, no county official could enforce a gun regulation as all are in violation of both the state and U.S constitution.
Some ordinances in Va authorize the creating of militia to physically prevent enforcement.

Now, that said, some wording on some proposed ordinances states any NEW gun regulation. Others are more encompassing.

Fact remains all gun regulation IS a violation of the 2A and the RTKABA.

In ky all gun regulation, except preventing cc , including the ccdw permit scheme violates the ky constitution.

Those are just fact based on two one sentence articles in two constitutions.
Sentences that cannot be more clear until lawyers and judges put in made up words and phrases out of thin air that factually are in neither.
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,246
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Kentucky Constitution:
Section 219
Militia, what to consist of.
The militia of the Commonwealth of Kentucky shall consist of all able-bodied male residents of the State between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, except such persons as may be exempted by the laws of the State or of the United States.
 

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
Kentucky Constitution:
I was thinking more of this. The only authority granted the GA of ky concerning weapons.


Seventh: The right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the State, subject to the power of the General Assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.[1]
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,246
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Last edited:

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.

Ghost1958

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2015
Messages
1,255
Location
Kentucky
As I have said several times, the terms are never defined. How can you ban anything without defining what you are banning?
The terms are constantly defined. Have been for over two centuries.

If time permits I intend to push this in my home county.

However the wording will be simpler, pertaining to any gun related regulation, that no county funds, facilities or officers may enforce, or house anyone arrested for a gun regulation violation by any agent of any gov entity including federal agents.

And to authorize the forming of militia to prevent any such enforcement inside the county line by any state agency.

Nothing in this declaration will be considered to impair the GA from repealing existing gun regulation . However no regulation shall be recognized nor allowed to be enforced inside the county per the state and federal constitution
 
Last edited:

gutshot II

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2017
Messages
768
Location
Central Ky.
The terms are constantly defined. Have been for over two centuries.

If time permits I intend to push this in my home county.

However the wording will be simpler, pertaining to any gun related regulation, that no county funds, facilities or officers may enforce, or house anyone arrested for a gun regulation violation by any agent of any gov entity including federal agents.

And to authorize the forming of militia to prevent any such enforcement inside the county line by any state agency.

Nothing in this declaration will be considered to impair the GA from repealing existing gun regulation . However no regulation shall be recognized nor allowed to be enforced inside the county per the state and federal constitution

So if a county deputy sheriff sees a person carrying an AK 47 and 500 rounds of ammo into a school, he can't act on that because the county is a 2A Sanctuary and the "no guns in schools" statute is an infringement of the 2A? Is that how it works? Now, a city policeman is not affected by the county ordinance because he is not a county employees so we have to call a city policeman to arrest the gunman, but once he arrests the gunman the county jailer won't take him into custody because he is a county official and the 2A sanctuary ordinance says he can't be involved in any infringements of the 2A. Sounds great! Where do we sign up?
 
Top