Rutherford Co. declared 2nd Amendment Sanctuary

It really goes back to the premise of rulers and whether or not your willing to be ruled. To what degree are they willing to kill you for their ability to rule over you and how willing are you to kill them to prevent it.

As the artist formerly know as Mr. Chess Pigeon correctly stared, every law is backed by the threat of deadly force.
 
Last edited:
I think it's good. Mostly symbolic, but a good symbol. I was a little surprised, I hadn't heard anything about this coming up before the commissioners.
 
I'm packing my bags and guns. No not really.
 
As much as I applaud the bluster on the surface, it really is not much different than anti gun laws passed I CA or NY and NJ... except the gun grabber laws have more teeth...

In Rutherford Co, there will still be background checks. You better still pay the Knottingham Sherrif for your PPP. NFA items such as suppressors and SBRs are still NFA items... So really, all this is (calling Rutherford County a 2A sanctuary) is feel good bluster...

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
doose said:
As much as I applaud the bluster on the surface, it really is not much different than anti gun laws passed I CA or NY and NJ... except the gun grabber laws have more teeth...

In Rutherford Co, there will still be background checks. You better still pay the Knottingham Sherrif for your PPP. NFA items such as suppressors and SBRs are still NFA items... So really, all this is (calling Rutherford County a 2A sanctuary) is feel good bluster...

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

So what are the Lexington Co Comissioners and Sheriff doing to show support for the 2nd Amendment?
 
noway2 said:
My guess is these guys fall into the I support the 2nd, but ... Category.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's kinda what I was thinking too. Lol, I know people get tired of me, they want me to just give up, but I can't brother. I know this is bigger than me. I just watched a video of a man...just filming, holding a sign, that had the f word on it, get arrested. What happened to Freedom of speech too? How dangerous is filming, holding a sign, expressing your opinion? We can just arrest whomever, whenever now? For victimless crimes? I don't get it, and I don't support it. Certain unalienable, God givin rights, givin to us by our Creator...is now an arrestable offence? Who gave them such power? I'm pretty sure We The People didn't.
 
Last edited:
Guys, the impact with such proclamations is not that current law is gonna be ignored, but rather the hassle/harassment factor often found in other areas will be ignored.
-Get stopped at a roadside checkpoint, declare your permit and gun. No problem.
-Keep your gun locked in the glovebox at school. No problem.
-Apply for a carry permit. No problem.
-100 rd magazine. No problem.
-Open carry in the park. No problem.
-Shoot legally on your property. No problem...no matter how many times the Teacher complains.

The local businesses know the area has been proclaimed gun friendly, and don't mind if the cop comes in uniform to pay for his wedding ring.
The subliminal message is that if you're one of those hyper-sensitive about guns, well, we respect that, and you're welcome to leave.

These are the everyday things that gun owners have to deal with. I like it when the locals recognize that I'm one of the good guys and hassling me about the gun is gonna stop.
 
Friday said:
Guys, the impact with such proclamations is not that current law is gonna be ignored, but rather the hassle/harassment factor often found in other areas will be ignored.
-Get stopped at a roadside checkpoint, declare your permit and gun. No problem.
-Keep your gun locked in the glovebox at school. No problem.
-Apply for a carry permit. No problem.
-100 rd magazine. No problem.
-Open carry in the park. No problem.
-Shoot legally on your property. No problem...no matter how many times the Teacher complains.

The local businesses know the area has been proclaimed gun friendly, and don't mind if the cop comes in uniform to pay for his wedding ring.
The subliminal message is that if you're one of those hyper-sensitive about guns, well, we respect that, and you're welcome to leave.

These are the everyday things that gun owners have to deal with. I like it when the locals recognize that I'm one of the good guys and hassling me about the gun is gonna stop.
Click to expand...

I've had the pleasure of chewing on the ass of the Forest City chief of police after one of his officers used my duty to inform as a way to conduct a fishing expedition for stolen guns. This happened seven or eight years ago. Within a week I went through another one of their check points and after showing ID and permit all I got was have a nice night.

I grew up around guns. I was in the woods hunting before I needed to buy hunting liscence. I knew the power of guns early in life. I was a scrawny kid growing up. Got bullied a lot. Not once did I consider using a gun to settle a score.

Today I understand that there are people who wish to force their will upon others. The only thing stopping them is the fact that when push comes to shove they know gun owners have a way to repel them. Until they disarm us we are a threat to them.

Proclamation or not I've made my mind up. I'll carry until I die. You come after mine, I'll meet you at the door. BYOBB. (Bring your own body bag.)

By the way, I'm a resident of Rutherford Co. NC. Been here most of my life. I'm from Irish stock and have a rebel streak in me.

Sent from my SM-J320V using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
I am not sure that I understand several of the responses in this thread.
My assumption is that the state is always going to claim power for itself that was not delegated to it. Always. Always. Always. When we have what has been historically called the "Lesser magistrates" who show signs of being willing to defy their superiors for the sake of Freedom we should always applaud that. Whether it is 100% consistent or not. In fact we should assume that no magistrates, greater or lesser, will ever be the kind of Champions for Freedom that we would like. That animal simply does not exist. I always assume that people in Authority will be a mixed bag either relatively more or less willing to stand up for freedom.
The closer that you get to community and local level, the more prominent the willingness to let people live as they wish will be.
Rather than mock the imperfect and inconsistent attempts of locals to stand up for freedom, and point out that they are hypocrites because they are not 100% where they should be, I think it better to applaud them encourage them and stand behind them when we do see them do the very very rare thing of risking the anger of people with more power than they for standing up for what is right.
In the public Arena if you demand 100% perfection or nothing, you will get nothing every time
 
From the news clip:
"The Commissioner's move is more political statement than actually powerful, since the Commissioner cannot trump any federal laws"

Funny how none of the news outlets say this about immigration sanctuary cities/counties/states.
 
tanstaafl72555 said:
Rather than mock the imperfect and inconsistent attempts of locals to stand up for freedom, and point out that they are hypocrites because they are not 100% where they should be, I think it better to applaud them encourage them and stand behind them when we do see them do the very very rare thing of risking the anger of people with more power than they for standing up for what is right.
Click to expand...
As I stated above, it is a good step to take. They really should be commended for it. However, it remains to be seen, nor have they indicated, what if any specific action they mean by this. Let's assume they mean that they would do what they could to see that "unconstituional" gun control will be ignored. Operating under this assumption, what do they consider unconstitional? The PPP program? The GCA? The NFA? In other words, it's good that they adopted said stance, but what does it really mean it practice?
 
noway2 said:
As I stated above, it is a good step to take. They really should be commended for it. However, it remains to be seen, nor have they indicated, what if any specific action they mean by this. Let's assume they mean that they would do what they could to see that "unconstituional" gun control will be ignored. Operating under this assumption, what do they consider unconstitional? The PPP program? The GCA? The NFA? In other words, it's good that they adopted said stance, but what does it really mean it practice?
Click to expand...
Oh you know they are going to collect those permit fees, because it's the law and they just enforce it.
 
noway2 said:
And if you think about it, you might realize how stupid of a concept that is. Law is nothing but words on paper. Oh, there was a vote. Big whoop.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but those "words on paper" carry life changing implications. They are, after all, backed by the threat of force.
 
Is this leagal? said:
Yeah, but those "words on paper" carry life changing implications. They are, after all, backed by the threat of force.
Click to expand...
I was having a ham radio conversation about this earlier in the week. In summary, we basically agreed that the current legal and “enforcement” system is just an abstraction on the ages old concept of rule by the strongman. Today it is wrapped in feel good illusions about elections and consent and other nonsense, but it’s still the same basic principle. It’s still just as disgusting.
 
As an anarchist, I am NOT opposed to the rule of law. Anarchy does not mean without rule of law. It means without a permanent ruling (ie law enforcement) class of people, permanently empowered to enforce the law. "No laws" is the mistaken notion that many people have of anarchy. Some dictionary definitions also reflect that nonsense. This mistake leads people to believe that the only two options are a permanent class of people empowered to do violence against people if they "break the law" vs armed gangs roving and terrorizing the citizenry.

It is this idiotic and false distinction which leads many well meaning conservatives to suck on their teeth and exclaim "well, we just need to 'reign them in and make them accountable...' " by which they mean... VOTE.

This leads to an endless quest to "get the right people" in office... especially from the top down, with the reasoning that power flows down. It thus leads to an endless succession of frustrations and disappointments with the political process. I much prefer Mexico, for example. The avg Mexican does not believe any of the romantic nonsense about "the responsibility to vote" but rather assumes the government will be corrupt, dishonest, aggressive and foolish. They simply ignore laws which make no sense, and try as best they can to stay off the radar, while paying off officials when they DO come under scrutiny.

One of the great frustrations to me is many good, responsible citizens who believe some crock of nonsense that "we are different" and that eagerly participating in the process which delegates power to rule make things "more fair" and somehow makes our nation different. The founding fathers would have collapsed into hysterical laughter if you told them that. Otherwise good and decent people get snookered into supporting a corrupt, murderous, thieving, liberty destroying system..., and count themselves lucky that they can do so.... and get pissed off about it when you tell them this is what is happening!!! It truly is bizarre to me.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom