Category Archives: Second Amendment

Two gun rights groups planning to host a rally of 130,000 supporters Monday at the Virginia state Capitol have sued to repeal Democratic Gov. Ralph Northams ban on guns, even for those with permits.

Governor Northam is behaving like the royal governors who long preceded him. He has arrogantly and brazenly tried to restrict the rights protected to Virginians by the First and Second Amendments, said Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America.

His group is joining the other rally organizer, Virginia Citizens Defense League, in pushing to win back gun rights on Capitol grounds for the Monday lobby day when members planned to press lawmakers to reject a wave of gun control legislation sailing through the Senate.

Gun Owners of America is joining VCDL in asking the courts to issue an emergency injunction forbidding the enforcement of the governors unlawful ban. The Lobby Day rally is held annually with thousands of participants and without incident. The only difference this year is that, in response to the Democrats attempt to eviscerate the Second Amendment, a much larger crowd is expected, said Pratt.

GOA is arguing that the governors actions violate the Virginia and U.S. Constitutions, as well as, a 2012 state law which strictly limits the governors ability to ban guns in a state of emergency, he added.

Earlier in the day, VCDL ripped the governors emergency decree and suggested that Democrats were hoping for violence at the rally so they could smear gun owners.

In that alert to some 38,000 supporters, VCDL said:

VCDL believes that this gun ban is illegal. Our legal team is looking at our options and we will keep you advised as soon as we have a definitive plan. As it stands now, you can carry on 9th Street, or other nearby streets, as long as you don't go into the fenced-in Capitol grounds area (or into any of the government buildings). There will be 17 magnetometers to speed up security for those wishing to be on the Capitol grounds, which puts you near the stage. You CAN have a knife with a blade LESS THAN 3 inches. Again, wait for final word on the Capitol grounds gun-ban situation over the weekend.

[Read more: Trump could be big beneficiary' in Virginia gun control battle, urged to get involved]

Read more:
Virginia sued over Second Amendment rally gun ban - Washington Examiner

As an incorporated provision of the United States Bill of Rights, the Second Amendment is the supreme law of the land, applying to all U.S. jurisdictions and to the actions of federal, state, and local officials. The U.S. Supreme Court provides the final and authoritative interpretation of that provision, as well as other provisions of the U.S. Constitution. All of this is elementary civics.

But the State of California believes it knows better, requiring publisher McGraw-Hill to annotate a discussion of the Bill of Rights in a popular social studies textbook with the states own peculiar view of the Second Amendments meaning.

According to pictures from the California edition in the New York Times, the annotation states:

Right to Bear Arms This amendment is often debated. Originally it was intended to prevent the national government from repeating the actions of the British, who tried to take weapons away from the colonial militia, or armed forces of the citizens. This amendment seems to support the right of citizens to own firearms, but the Supreme Court has ruled it does not prevent Congress from regulating the interstate sale of weapons.

The Times article goes on to state that the publisher said it had created the additional wording on the Second Amendment and gun control for the California textbook. The same language, however, does not appear in a national version of the same section, according to the Times report.

The point of the New York Times article is to suggest that different states emphasize different aspects of U.S. history in otherwise similar textbooks, depending on the prevailing political outlook among the states education officials.

Whatever might be said of that approach, the problem with Californias account of the Second Amendment isnt just one of emphasis but of accuracy. California, which prides itself on being one of the most anti-gun states in the nation, simply gets it wrong, using language that falsely portrays the Second Amendment as a debated provision that has changed meaning over time and that only seems to protect an individual right.

Any debate about the Second Amendments protection of an individual right have been authoritatively settled by the U.S. Supreme Court: The Second Amendment protects the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation, independent of service in an organized militia. That fact was unambiguously articulated in District of Columbia v. Heller in 2008.

That decision, moreover, was based on the public understanding of the Second Amendment at the time it was ratified. In other words, not only was the Second Amendment an individual right as of 2008, it has always been an individual right. As the Supreme Court noted, virtually all interpreters of the Second Amendment in the century after its enactment interpreted the Amendment as we do. It is false to suggest, as the California textbook does, that it originally meant something different and then somehow changed meaning in 2008.

Regarding the prefatory militia clause, the Supreme Court took pains to explain the difference between the justification for including the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights and the scope and substance of that right.

The debate with respect to the right to keep and bear arms, as with other guarantees in the Bill of Rights, was not over whether it was desirable (all agreed that it was) but over whether it needed to be codified in the Constitution, the court wrote. What justified its codification was the threat that the new Federal Government would destroy the citizens' militia by taking away their arms . But, the court noted, the prefatory militia clause announcing the reason for the rights codification does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.

That scope, meanwhile, included using arms for self-defense and hunting, with self-defense being the central component of the right itself, according to the Supreme Court.

The California textbook also misconstrues what the term militia meant to the founding generation at the time of the Second Amendments enactment. It wasnt just a discrete, organized military force, the court explained, but members of the population physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense, whether they were mustered in that capacity or not. Thus, the terms militia and the people are not at odds with each other in the Second Amendment. The people, with their own arms, are the basis of the militia. To protect the peoples private right to arms is therefore to protect the militias ability to muster with arms and to preserve its viability.

As for Congress ability to regulate the interstate sale of weapons, the Supreme Court indicated in Heller that laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms are part of the longstanding history and tradition of the Second Amendment, and are thus presumptively lawful. That does not mean, however, that every such law trumps the amendments protections, especially if there is no longstanding precedent for it.

In any event, the Supreme Court has yet to hear a case that pits the Second Amendment against the Commerce Clause, and it explicitly reserved that and other questions for later consideration. [S]ince this case represents this Courts first in-depth examination of the Second Amendment, one should not expect it to clarify the entire field, the court wrote. [T]here will be time enough to expound upon the historical justifications for the exceptions we have mentioned if and when those exceptions come before us.

California likes to emphasize how it sees things differently than the rest of the United States. Thats why common consumer products come with warnings that they include substances known to the State of California to pose various hazards, including cancer or birth defects. So numerous are these warnings that people at this point are most likely to ignore them as sensational and unreliable.

The states students would be wise to take the same approach to official state pronouncements about firearms and the Second Amendment.

California, as the saying goes, is entitled to its opinions. But its not entitled to its own facts.

And when it comes to the Second Amendment, the facts are different than the opinions expressed in the California-specific version of McGraw-Hills social studies textbook.

Activist Wilma Mankiller is quoted as saying, Whoever controls the education of our children controls our future.

Year after year California chips away at the Second Amendment with its ever-expanding gun control regime.

If this continues unabated, the right to keep and bear arms will effectively be nullified for future generations of Californians.

Whats worse if Californias educational bureaucrats have their way is that those generations will be too ignorant of their liberties to even understand what has been taken from them.

Our advice to these students is to exercise their First Amendment rights to learn and speak the truth, and as soon as they are able, exercise the right to vote in favor of those who respect their fundamental liberties, rather than those who try to write them out of history.

See the original post:
State of Ignorance: California Pushes False Information to School Kids on the Second Amendment - NRA ILA

Once again, the radical left has taken things too far. Recently, the Virginia legislature voted to put unconstitutional restrictions on law abiding citizens regarding the right to bear arms. These new laws go directly against the Second Amendment, which unequivocally guarantees this right.

Dont be fooled: while the fight today is in Virginia, that doesnt mean our Second Amendment rights are safe here. Any attempt to restrict the Second Amendment will have consequences across the country. If we let the radical Left get away with this, they will try this at the federal level next.

The Constitution couldnt be clearer when it comes to the Second Amendment: the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. There are no qualifiers or restrictions in that statement. The Second Amendment is straightforward and crystal clear.

This is about more than just the rights of gun owners. This is about defending the Constitution against attacks from those who wish to rewrite our laws, destroy our values and fundamentally transform our country.

Our Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they were able to see the steps that Virginias Democrat politicians have taken to restrict freedom. Now more than ever, freedom loving Americans across the nation have to remain vigilant and push back against policies that threaten our God-given, inalienable rights.

The Declaration of Independence makes it clear that our rights come from God, our creator. The government was intended to protect the rights that were gifted from God, not place restrictions on our rights.

As a gun owner myself, I have always fought to protect the Second Amendment. I have consistently voted for concealed carry reciprocity, to make sure that Americans are able to carry their firearm across state lines. Ive voted to protect the right to carry on federal lands, which is incredibly important for hunters and outdoorsmen. Ive also strongly advocated to end restrictions against carrying a gun on military bases. It is ridiculous to think that American service members trained in the defense of their nation cannot defend themselves on their own bases.

Last year, I led some of my conservative colleagues in supporting the Second Amendment during a major Supreme Court case against the City of New York. The liberals in New York City passed grossly overreaching and unconstitutional ordinances infringing on the Second Amendment. It is crucial we continue confirming conservative judges so that we have justices on the bench that will honor their oath and protect the Second Amendment in times like this when are rights are under attack.

It is saddening to see that now, in 2020, the tyranny our forefathers fought against with blood, sweat and tears is returning. Let us be honest with the American people: gun control is not about safety. It is about power. Radical Democratic politicians are attempting to strip power away from the everyday American before our very eyes.

With their latest political games, the radical left is not just attacking gun owners. They are again trying to tear our Constitution and our country apart by growing government and putting more restrictions on law abiding Americans.

It is more important now than ever before that Alabama has a senator who will fight back against the radical left and who will always stand up for the Second Amendment. Thats why Im running for the Senate: to defend the Constitution and protect our Second Amendment rights.

U.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne is a Republican from Fairhope. He is a 2020 candidate for the U.S. Senate.

See the article here:
Byrne: More important than ever to fight for the Second Amendment - Yellowhammer News

When one of the Pennsylvania Legislatures most conservative members announced her desire to pass Second Amendment Sanctuary ordinances that defy state and federal gun laws, the temptation at first was to laugh and shake your head in disbelief.

In barely a year in the state House, Rep. Stephanie Borowicz, a Republican who hails from rural Clinton County, has proven to be anything but shy when it comes to courting controversy. So when Borowicz dropped her press release on Second Amendment Sanctuaries, it barely registered as a ripple on Twitter.

But as The Trace, a site that tracks gun violence-reduction efforts reports, theres plenty of reason to pay attention. Thats because Borowicz has quietly inserted herself into a movement that stretches across more than 400 municipalities in 20 states.

If the term Second Amendment Sanctuary, sounds familiar, theres a reason for that. As The Trace reports, backers purposefully modeled them on so-called Sanctuary Cities, where local officials decline to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

Were just stealing the language that sanctuary cities use, Bryan Kibler, the states attorney in Effingham County, Illinois, told the Associated Press in 2018, according to The Trace.

The county approved its own gun sanctuary in April 2018, according to published reports, saying gun laws then under consideration by the Illinois General Assembly were unconstitutionally broad.

As The Daily Item of Sunbury, Pa., reported earlier this month, the state branch of a group called Gun Owners of America has volunteers working statewide on such ordinances. Officials in Bradford County, along the New York State border enacted such a resolution last December. Another northeastern Pennsylvania municipality is reportedly considering its own resolution.

In her statement, Borowicz said she was expressing my complete support for efforts in two counties in her district to protect law-abiding residents against unconstitutional gun control laws imposed in Harrisburg or Washington, D.C.

Among those measures are a proposed red flag law now before the Legislature that would allow police, acting on a court-order, to temporarily seize someones weapons if they believe they pose an immediate threat to themselves or to public safety.

These extreme risk protection order laws, as theyre formally known have been shown in other states to have reduced gun crimes and suicide.

While legal experts and others believe Second Amendment Sanctuaries are mostly symbolic and not legally binding, others say that they could lead to expensive litigation for local governments that decline to enforce state and federal gun laws.

To the extent that police chiefs and especially prosecutors view these actions by local governments as reflections of widespread community sentiment, they may feel more comfortable in adjusting their own exercise of discretion in making arrests and in charging decisions, George Mason University law professor Nelson Lund told The Daily Item. At least in that sense, it is probably not accurate to characterize them as mere publicity stunts.

Ultimately, the final battle over these local ordinances will be waged in the courts.

The proper procedure if law enforcement officers and local governments have issue with new laws is to bring legal action in the courts, and have courts determine whether those laws are constitutional, Jonathan Lowy, the vice president of the legal action project at the gun reform group Brady, told The Trace.

There is no small irony here that the very legislators and officials pursuing these sanctuary protections are those who kick back the hardest when local officials, tired of federal and state-level inaction on gun violence-reduction issues, move to enact ordinances stronger than those in existing federal law.

Such was the case when officials in Pittsburgh enacted tough local ordinances in the wake of a murderous spree at the Tree of Life Synagogue in 2018 that claimed the lives of 11 people.

Pennsylvania state Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, a Republican and outspoken gun-rights activist, called for Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Pedutos impeachment as a result.

Republicans already have an image problem with voters when it comes to gun issues. Theyll have even more explaining to do when a mass shooting erupts in one of their Second Amendment paradises.

An award-winning political journalist, John L. Micek is Editor-in-Chief of The Pennsylvania Capital-Star in Harrisburg and former Opinion Editor and Political Columnist at PennLive/The Patriot-News. Email him at jmicek@penncapital-star.com and follow him on Twitter @ByJohnLMicek.

Originally posted here:
'Second Amendment Sanctuaries' are the Right's new gun push - Uniontown Herald Standard

Posted: Jan 20, 2020 / 06:20 AM EST / Updated: Jan 20, 2020 / 06:22 AM EST

FT. GAY, W.Va. (WOWK) On Friday, January 17, Ft. Gay, West Virginia became the first town in the state to declare itself a sanctuary for the Second Amendment.

Mayor Joetta Hatfield said, The members of the town council are proud to be the first municipality in West Virginia to adopt an ordinance that formally establishes Ft. Gay as a sanctuary against any attempt by legislators or members of Congress to infringe the Second Amendment rights of Ft. Gays citizens.

Mayor Hatfield also said that the council was motivated by the recent fall of the Commonwealth of Virginia, of which West Virginia was once a part, into the hands of those now rushing to strip away the constitutional right to bear arms.

Earlier in the week West Virginias Putnam County became a sanctuary county for the Second Amendment when its county commission voted to pass the measure.

Ft. Gay is located in Wayne County. Allen Whitt, Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate, attended the historic vote in Ft. Gay; which is located on the Kentucky border about 20 miles south of Huntington, West Virginia. Whitt said, Tonight was one of the many reasons Im proud to be a West Virginian.

The Ft. Gay council members made a bold statement that will defend their citizens constitutional rights to legally own firearms. Town council members said becoming a sanctuary city will protect against efforts by legislators pushing red flag gun laws.

Im running for the U.S. Senate because our current Senator Shelley Moore Capito says red flag gun laws make sense to her. Well they certainly shouldnt make sense to anyone who has vowed to support the U.S. Constitution, but on May 12th, a vote for Allen Whitt for U.S. Senate will make sense for gun owners and hunters.

Red flag laws strip gun owners from due process if someone calls and raises a red flag of concern about the owner. Their guns could be confiscated with no evidence of wrongdoing based on a fraudulent complaint.

More here:
Ft. Gay, West Virginia becomes first Second Amendment sanctuary town in the state - WVNS-TV

COAL GROVE, Ohio Joining other communities around the Tri-State, the Lawrence County Board of Commissioners adopted a resolution declaring Lawrence County as a Second Amendment sanctuary.

Officials in Boyd, Greenup, Lawrence and Pike counties in Kentucky have adopted a similar, non-binding resolution and Cabell County is considering a similar measure after Putnam County became the first West Virginia county to pass such a resolution.

The non-binding, symbolic resolution says that the three Republican commissioners declared their intent to oppose any unlawful infringement on the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms using such legal means as may be expedient including, without limitation, court action.

The board was asked last week to consider the resolution by the local chapter of the National Wild Turkey Federation.

It is always the desire of this board to abide by Ohio law, ordinances or statutes, said Commission President DeAnna Holliday. As a member of the Wild Turkey Federation, Im honored to know that hundreds of members who believe in the rights of hunting individuals in our county and state join me in support of this resolution.

As a gun owner, I hope others will recognize this is not an attempt to legislate or dictate to you as to what we intend, Holliday said. We stand today to send a signal to all that we believe the 2nd Amendment gives us the constitutional right to own firearms without any impedance.

Finally, as a wife, mother and grandmother, I hereby declare that we have the right of self-protection, she said. As women, we do not necessarily have to turn to a man for protection. We have the constitutional right to protect ourselves and our family with a firearm.

Commissioners Colton Copley and Freddie Hayes Jr. also voted for the resolution.

It doesnt cost any money to do this, Hayes said. There is no cost to taxpayers.

The board also received and filed a request by Joseph Benning of the Symmes Creek Restoration Committee to seek state funding for signs at several locations in the county. The exact locations will be determined before the grant request is sent to the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, Benning said.

In other action, the board:

See the rest here:
Lawrence County, Ohio, joins ranks of counties declaring themselves 'Second Amendment sanctuaries' - Huntington Herald Dispatch

Another New Jersey municipality has adopted a pro-Second Amendment resolution, following a lengthy debate touching on gun laws, domestic violence, self-defense, misinformation and even a reference to weapons restrictions in Nazi Germany.

The Stillwater Township Committee adopted a resolution declaring Stillwater a Second Amendment / Lawful Gun Owner Township" on Tuesday night, but not everyone in the room was cheering.

Some in the audience of more than 60 spoke in opposition to the resolution, which does not supersede any state or federal laws, before it was approved in a 3-1 vote.

It resembled resolutions passed in at least seven other New Jersey municipalities since December.

Stillwater Mayor Lisa Chammings cast the lone dissenting vote, stating that while she supports the Second Amendment she was not comfortable with the part of the resolution claiming that red flag laws - statutes that allow for removing weapons from someone judged a threat to themselves or others - had been "misapplied and misused and run afoul of the U.S. Constitution.

I know the amount of domestic violence this township went through, Chammings, whose late father was Stillwaters last police chief, told the audience from the dais.

She also alluded to the suicide of a police officer.

The governing body in Stillwater, located in Sussex County, undertook the resolution at the behest of Assemblyman Parker Space, R-24th District, who voted against New Jerseys 4-month-old red flag law. The four committee members who voted Tuesday are Republicans.

Space spoke several times during Tuesdays meeting. He outlined a hypothetical confrontation involving Stillwater committee member Vera Rumsey in asserting that New Jerseys red flag law could facilitate a false allegation against him.

With red flag laws, we can sit down and have coffee - Vera and I, or Committeewoman Rumsey, and we could be talking about different things and she could feel - maybe, He was talking about Donald Trump and I dont like him, and I felt kind of threatened by what he had to say, and then she could, in return, report me, and then pretty soon theyre coming to my door, taking my firearms away, Space said.

Space, though, was describing a different process than exists under New Jerseys red flag law, formally known as the Extreme Risk Protective Order Act of 2018.

It allows for a judge in response to a request from family or household members, or law enforcement to order the removal of guns and ammunition from someone who poses a significant danger of bodily injury to self or others, as described in the statute.

The legislation received crossover support from many Republicans, passing the Senate by 32-5 and Assembly by 59-12. At least 17 other states have similar laws, including Florida, where Space at one point acknowledged owning property.

Some in the audience who spoke in support of the resolution, though, appeared to pick up on the idea that the red flag law, and others, are simply a pretense for seizing weapons. There was applause when one speaker drew a parallel to gun restrictions under the Nazis in Germany.

Kathleen Marshall, who spoke in opposition to the resolution, expressed dismay at the outcome.

Im heartbroken, Marshall, a Stillwater resident since 1992, told NJ Advance Media.

I love my town. I think theres a lot of misinformation and ignorance about what the actual laws are. They go right to, theyre taking our guns away, and thats not what this is about, Marshall said.

Kathleen Marshall, a Stillwater resident who addressed the township committee in opposition to the resolution, remains at the meeting following the vote, Jan. 21, 2020Rob Jennings / NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

After Donna Price, a Stillwater resident, spoke in opposition to the resolution and disagreed with Spaces characterization of red flag laws, a man in the audience asked her if she felt threatened by him.

I do, Price said.

In response, the man responded, perhaps facetiously, that Space might get in trouble as a result.

You just got red-flagged, the man said.

Tuesdays meeting, while at times tense, remained civil. Every seat in the room, which has a maximum capacity of 55, was taken, and there appeared to be up to two dozen others standing along the side and back walls and just outside the door.

Kaitlyn Hammerle, a Stillwater resident, spoke in support of the resolution.

All it is saying is that Stillwater respects and supports the lawfully abiding gun ownership of all the residents. It avoids using the word sanctuary, which could be misconstrued as allowing illegal firearms," Hammerle said in a reference to a version of the resolution adopted in West Milford and, last week, by the Cape May County freeholder board.

Mike Vrabel of Sparta spoke in opposition. He said the current laws do not violate the rights of law-abiding gun owners and refuted assertions from Second Amendment advocates that increasing access to guns would save lives.

Vrabel, a U.S. Air Force veteran, alluded to a friendly-fire incident in 1989 in Panama, that he witnessed, that claimed the life of a 19-year-old Army Ranger.

As far as the good guy with a gun theory, I understand the emotional appeal of that, said Vrabel, a member of the Sussex County chapter of Brady formerly the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.

Ask yourself, if an incident happens, and you are armed, and you have your concealed carry permit which I know is almost impossible in New Jersey are you up to the task, because even an Army Ranger can falter, Vrabel said.

As he concluded, someone from the audience shouted, How many people were saved in Texas - a reference to a gunman at a Texas church who was fatally shot by another church member Dec. 29, but not before the gunman killed two people inside the building.

Votes in additional places seem likely. Space has asked municipalities in Sussex and Warren counties, along with both freeholder boards, to consider pro-Second Amendment resolutions.

Two Sussex County freeholders, board director Sylvia Petillo and Herb Yardley, attended Tuesdays meeting but did not address the Stillwater committee.

Assemblyman Parker Space, R-24th District, in hat, with Sussex County Freeholder Herbert Yardley at the township committee meeting in Stillwater, Jan. 21, 2020Rob Jennings / NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

In contrast with the mayor, George Scott, the townships deputy mayor, offered unambiguous support for the totality of the resolution.

Im concerned that theyre going to come in and take my guns, Scott said.

Chammings, while stating her support for the Second Amendment, said she could not back the resolution without hearings specific problems regarding red flag laws.

I dont know how its being misused or misapplied, she told NJ Advance Media following the vote, in quoting back the part of the resolution that gave her pause.

Stillwater is home to about 3,900.

Rob Jennings may be reached at rjennings@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter@RobJenningsNJ. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

See original here:
Were afraid theyll take our guns, N.J.'s newest 2nd Amendment town says - NJ.com

Editor's note: The story below has been edited to correct an error in the story that appeared in the Jan. 22 print edition of The Sun. Kentucky United spokesperson Sean Hall met with Washington County Judge-Executive Timothy Graves to review a proposed resolution, not County Attorney Bill Robinson. A correction will appear in the Jan. 29 edition of The Sun.

Update: Since this story went to press, the Nelson County Fiscal Court voted to pass a resolution in support of the Second Amendment.

A group that has pressured county governments across Kentucky to take action regarding the Second Amendment has set its sights on Washington County, resulting in the fiscal court planning to take up the issue for the second time Friday.

Magistrates heard comments at their Jan. 13 meeting, at which time County Judge-Executive Timothy Graves stated passing a resolution presented to the court by the group would be an illegal act.

Washington County Attorney Bill Robinson cited a Kentucky law that states local governments can make no ordinance in relation to the Second Amendment or gun issues in general.

The cited law says any action in regards to gun control is null and void and unenforceable.

Robinson said additionally, the county, the fiscal court, and individual magistrates would be subject to civil and criminal penalties if they took action of any kind.

But Graves said the matter did not die.

Following that meeting, the county attorney went to work drafting something we could act on, he said. He looked at what other counties are passing and how they worded it.

And Kentucky United did not give up. Members presented a second resolution to the fiscal court.

Bill (Robinson) looked it over and took some of the verbiage from it and merged that with the resolution he was drafting, Graves said. We believe we have come up with a resolution that we can pass that meets the desires of the group but does not put us in a position where we would be legally liable.

Sean Hall, a spokesperson for Kentucky United-Washington County, met with Graves over the weekend and was allowed to review the revised resolution.

Overall, Im OK with the new resolution, he said. Theres a little give and take to find something we can both agree on.

Hall said he posted the revised resolution for the group to review and the response has been pretty positive.

He said the resolution doesnt identify red flag laws directly but does cover what is included in those laws.

Hall said last Monday was the first time he and most of the other people who came to address the fiscal court had attended such an assembly and certainly had never participated in public meetings.

We thought there would be more discussion and a dialogue between us and the magistrates, he said.

Hall went on to say many of those in attendance felt their voices were not heard.

"The decision had been made before we got there," he said. "We were very unhappy when we left the courthouse on Monday.

Some members of Kentucky United took to Facebook to express their frustration at Washington County not taking action Jan. 13.

A member with the Facebook profile name Curry Haydon posted, Its an absolute shame that Washington county did not pass this, disappointed in my county is an understatement.

On a Facebook page called Washington County United, someone with the profile name Craig Settled posted, Man I hope WC fiscal court can educate themselves very quickly or well they are gonna have a 4 year stint in their elected positions. This is way more important than a certain road getting blacktopped and that magistrate lost his elected position. I wish them luck but if they need help I say some of the counties around them will help educate them and lend them a spine. Its funny how words are holding this up. I mean come on it dont take someone with that much education to re-write something. How hard is that?? If it thats hard get a English teacher to help them. No need of being scared because if youre scared then step out of the way and let the big boys and girls do the job.

Someone with the profile name C.D. Wandle said, Shame on our elected officials spineless,gutless,money handlers, and a profile with the name Papaw Baker posted, We need to make this a one term judge executive.

Kentucky United members have been the driving force behind a recent, so far unsuccessful, push to have a Second Amendment resolution passed in neighboring Nelson County. (Group members have said they will not support a compromise resolution proposed.)

Neighboring Marion and Boyle counties have both passed resolutions.

Hall said at the fiscal court's Jan. 13 meeting that Kentucky United is concerned about bills proposed in Virginia, and concerned that similar legislation could be passed in Kentucky.

Protesters spent Martin Luther King Jr. Day in Virginia's capital city protesting, many armed.

According to at least one post on the Kentucky United Facebook page, the protests are just the beginning.

Guys its happening the Governor of the state of Virginia has called a state of emergency starting Friday evening due to the threat of violence over our second amendment rights this is the tip of the iceberg, states a post by someone whose profile name is Mike Perraut.

Graves said his office had received a lot of feedback following the fiscal courts Jan. 13 meeting.

This is a hot-topic issue, he said, People are very passionate and vocal on both sides. We think we have come up with a resolution that provides a happy medium. And again, we want to do what is legal.

Read and share your thoughts on this story

Follow this link:
Washington County Fiscal Court to take up 2nd Amendment resolution again - The Springfield Sun

WASHINGTON, D.C. (WRIC) In a tweet posted Monday, hours after thousands rallied peacefully for gun rights in Virginia, President Donald Trump said he would never allow the Second Amendment to go unprotected.

I will NEVER allow our great Second Amendment to go unprotected, not even a little bit! President Trump wrote.

I will NEVER allow our great Second Amendment to go unprotected, not even a little bit!

The post comes hours after President Trump tweeted his disapproval with the Democratic party in Virginia for working hard to take away citizens constitutional right to bear arms in the United States.

The Democrat Party in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia are working hard to take away your 2nd Amendment rights, President Trump tweeted Monday. This is just the beginning. Dont let it happen, VOTE REPUBLICAN in 2020!

The Democrat Party in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia are working hard to take away your 2nd Amendment rights. This is just the beginning. Dont let it happen, VOTE REPUBLICAN in 2020!

On Friday, President Trump tweeted that the Second Amendment was under very serious attack in Virginia.

Thats what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away, the president wrote. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems!

Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. Thats what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems!

The tweet came after Virginia Gov. Ralph Northamdeclared a state of emergencyahead of Mondays pro-gun rights rally in Richmond as a result of credible, serious threats of violence.

8News has learned a Richmond woman with a bandanna covering her face was charged after the pro-gun rally. A man was cited for trying to climb up the fire escape of the 12-story Mutual Building at 909 E. Main Street, as well.

RELATED: President Trump: Second Amendment is under very serious attack in Virginia

President Trumps proclamation comes exactly three years after he was sworn into office. Trump declared, in a tweet, unemployment was the lowest in the history of the United States while adding his presidency had seen the best poverty, youth and employment numbers, ever.

It was exactly three years ago today, January 20, 2017, that I was sworn into office. So appropriate that today is also MLK jr DAY. African-American Unemployment is the LOWEST in the history of our Country, by far. Also, best Poverty, Youth, and Employment numbers, ever. Great!

LATEST STORIES:

Original post:
President Trump: Second Amendment will never go unprotected - 8News

President TrumpDonald John TrumpNational Archives says it altered Trump signs, other messages in Women's March photo Dems plan marathon prep for Senate trial, wary of Trump trying to 'game' the process Democratic lawmaker dismisses GOP lawsuit threat: 'Take your letter and shove it' MORE on Friday warned of an attack on the Second Amendment after Virginia Democrats curtailed access for firearms at the state capitol.

Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. Thats what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems! Trump tweeted.

Your 2nd Amendment is under very serious attack in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia. Thats what happens when you vote for Democrats, they will take your guns away. Republicans will win Virginia in 2020. Thank you Dems!

The tweet comes after state legislators voted last week to ban firearms at the state Capitol and Gov. Ralph Northam (D-Va.) declared a state of emergency to temporarily ban individuals from carrying weapons on its grounds.

Both moves came before a gun rights rally planned for next week that is expected to draw armed protesters and a mass of counter-protesters, raising fears of clashes between the two crowds.

Northam said in his statement declaring the emergency that his office had received credible intelligence of threats of violence surrounding the demonstration that included extremist rhetoric similar to that surrounding the deadly Unite the Right white supremacist rally in Charlottesville in 2017.

The Virginia Citizens Defense League, the organizers of the rally, has said that the demonstration will draw thousands to the area. The group'sFacebook event pageindicates thatmore than 5,000say they will attend.

"We support citizens rights to peacefully protest and express their views to their elected officials," said Northam. "But we must also keep the public, as well as those who work around Capitol Square, safe."

Virginia Democrats, who won total control of state government last year for the first time since 1994, are also eyeing several gun control measures as they seek to flex their muscles in their newfound majority.

Among the reformsthe party hopes to pass are universal background checks, a ban on assault weapons and a "red flag" law that would permit law enforcement to remove guns from those deemed to pose a danger to themselves or others.

View post:
Trump warns of 'attack' on 2nd Amendment ahead of Virginia gun rights rally | TheHill - The Hill