Why not? We had this discussion at work a few days ago. If California can ignore federal laws on immigration why can’t other states ignore laws restricting gun rights? Where does it stop? Can’t wait for the liberal view on which laws can be ignored and which must be followed/enforced.

Knew it had to be down state. Near where I grew up.

My home is also a sanctuary for guns.

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
My home is also a sanctuary for guns.

yes, especially undocumented EBRs that self identify as harmless hunting rifles.

Illinois really is a great State. Great south of I80 anyway. The problem is though that Illinois is run by the Chicago misfits. Eliminate them and Illinois would be attractive. I say make Chicago a separate State and let it sink on it's own without dragging everyone else with it.

quote:

Originally posted by Bulldog7972:
I say make Chicago a separate State Territory without voting representation in the Federal Government, like PR and others and let it sink on it's own without dragging everyone else with it.

FIFY.

quote:

Originally posted by RHINOWSO:

quote:

Originally posted by Ryanp225:
My home is also a sanctuary for guns.

yes, especially undocumented EBRs that self identify as harmless hunting rifles.

Mine identify as "typewriters".
I have an awful lot of "typewriters".

Unrelated factoid: Just south of Effingham is known as Little Egypt in Illinois. Glaciers got that far south before receding, leaving some of the best farm land in the world. South was sandy soil, no comparison. The stands of corn you'd see fifty years ago were just pathetic. Since then, what with hybrids and techniques, "Little Egypt" is far more productive.

Effingham has (had?) America's biggest cross at 198 feet, where interstates 57 and 70 intersect.

Who gave this dick any power?

"Effingham County State’s Attorney Bryan Kibler said that the action is largely symbolic and will not control decision-making by law enforcement."

The downside to this is that Effingham is so far south. I was hoping from the headline that it was someplace closer to our current location, so we could at least support local businesses, if not move there. Guess we still have to press to move to a Free State.

quote:

Originally posted by Sauer Kraut:
Why not? We had this discussion at work a few days ago. If California can ignore federal laws on immigration why can’t other states ignore laws restricting gun rights? Where does it stop?

It stops or ends in utter chaos. What I've long argued is, disrespect of the law by criminals is one thing, but when the public as a majority reaches the point where they no longer respect the rule of law, its a very bad and dangerous place for the country.

quote:

Originally posted by newtoSig765:
Who gave this dick any power?

"Effingham County State’s Attorney Bryan Kibler said that the action is largely symbolic and will not control decision-making by law enforcement."

Reread the article. The reporter did a poor job of structuring the quotes. I got the sense that Mr. Kibler was in support of the action but know how things will shake out.

quote:

Kibler said the measure may be "mostly symbolic," but they felt it was important to express that many residents in Effingham County are concerned about their Second Amendment rights slowly being stripped away.

That's my hometown! Still don't ever plan on moving back though.


Rick

quote:

Originally posted by Ripley:
Unrelated factoid: Just south of Effingham is known as Little Egypt in Illinois. Glaciers got that far south before receding, leaving some of the best farm land in the world. South was sandy soil, no comparison. The stands of corn you'd see fifty years ago were just pathetic. Since then, what with hybrids and techniques, "Little Egypt" is far more productive.

Effingham has (had?) America's biggest cross at 198 feet, where interstates 57 and 70 intersect.

The leaning cross of Effingham.

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:

The leaning cross of Effingham.

The leaning tower of lens distortion.

April 20, 2018

In Illinois: a ‘sanctuary county’ for Second Amendment
By Thomas Lifson

Kurt Schlichter long has been warning progressives that they’re going to hate living under the new rules they proclaim when trying to suppress their political enemies. Now, the entire “sanctuary city” and “sanctuary state” movement, intended to protect criminal illegal aliens from deportation by ICE when they are released from custody, has been mocked by a conservative country in Illinois. Douglas Ernst reports in the Washington Times:

An overwhelming majority of board members in Effingham County, Illinois, decided to “flip the script” this week and declare itself a “sanctuary” for gun owners.

Effingham County State’s Attorney Bryan Kibler and board member David Campbell called a barrage of gun-control bills working their way through the Illinois House and Senate a clear signal that it’s time to “take a stand.”

The men joined “Fox & Friends First” on Thursday to discuss a new Second Amendment resolution that passed along an 8-1 vote.

We “decided it’s time for someone to take a hard stand,” Mr. Campbell told the network.

The resolution reads: “If the Government of the State of Illinois shall infringe upon the inalienable rights granted by the Second Amendment, Effingham County shall become a ‘sanctuary county’ for all firearms.”

Now that nullification – the doctrine that localities can ignore laws they don’t like, that triggered the Civil War – is being embraced by progs, they had better take another look at the 2016 election map by county:



https://www.americanthinker.co...econd_amendment.html

quote:

The resolution reads: “If the Government of the State of Illinois shall infringe upon the inalienable rights granted by the Second Amendment, Effingham County shall become a ‘sanctuary county’ for all firearms.”

Although I'm tentatively in favor of what this county did here, I wish their county attorney had advised them a bit better on how this should have been worded. The 2A "grants" no right(s). It simply recognizes our unalienable human right of self protection which government is to protect and do nothing to infringe on.

quote:

The 2A "grants" no right(s). It simply recognizes our unalienable human right of self protection which government is to protect and do nothing to infringe on.

Right you are, sir!

How would any of the Founders have made the case for the Second Amendment? Why, in terms of unalienable rights, of course. The concept of unalienable rights is the key to understanding the American Founding. The Declaration of Independence declared that we have unalienable rights. It went on to declare that securing those rights is the very purpose of government – "to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men." According to the Declaration, any government that deviates from the noble purpose of securing those rights is illegitimate.

John Paul Stevens – how astonishing that this man once served on the Supreme Court, charged with upholding the Constitution! – and others have called for repealing the Second Amendment. But according to the Founders, repealing the Second Amendment would not get rid of our unalienable right to keep and bear arms. No action by government can overturn an unalienable right. An unalienable right remains no matter how a government moves against it. That's what "unalienable" means. Repealing the Second Amendment would not in put an end to the right it was designed to protect; it would only put an end to the government's claim to legitimacy.

How to Defend the Second Amendment
https://www.americanthinker.co...econd_amendment.html

Another one! Mercer Co is a few miles south of Rock Island.

https://qconline.com/news/loca...14-7c248233684d.html

Mercer County becomes state's 30th gun sanctuary

CATHY DECKER edecker@mchsi.com 50 min ago

ALEDO – The Mercer County Board passed a resolution Thursday night making the county the 30th gun sanctuary county in Illinois.

With a full approval of the board, the resolution opposes any state attempt to infringe on the rights of its citizens to "bear arms." The resolution deemed any such legislation currently being considered by the state "to be unconstitutional and beyond lawful legislative authority."

Mercer County Board member Brian Anseeuw, R-New Windsor, said the language in the resolution already has been approved in 29 other counties, as well as two cities.

"We’re telling the state they cannot pass laws that impinge on our Second Amendment rights,” he said.

After the vote, an an audience of about 15 people loudly clapped in support. Absent from Thursday's meeting were Chris DeFreize, R-New Boston, and Ronald Fullerlove, R-Sherrard.

The resolution demands the Illinois General Assembly "cease further actions restricting the right to keep and bear arms" and demands the governor of Illinois to veto all such legislation.

If the governor does sign such legislation, the resolution states, Mercer County will prohibit its employees from enforcing the action.

The resolution took issue with a number of state House and Senate bills that would require individuals to surrender lawfully owned firearms, or gun enhancements like bump stocks and trigger cranks. There also is an issue in the use of terms such as "assault weapons."

“What is an assault weapon?” asked board chairman Carlos Sarabasa, R-Aledo, suggesting the legislative language is not clear.

Mercer County Sheriff David Staley said he favors concealed carry of firearms and the right to own guns, as long as there are no mental health issues. "If you’re a law abiding citizen in our county it’s your right," he said.

Sarabasa said he had received a lot of questions asking if the resolution will bring an influx of guns to Mercer County.

"No," Sarabasa said. The main point of the resolution, he said, is to "keep the state from coming in and taking our guns."

(from Sigmund: Unrelated info follows)

In other law enforcement action Thursday, the county board discussed the financial repercussions of losing Chicago inmate incarceration at the county jail.

Staley said Chicago had been providing about $300,000 a year to the county jail budget by housing inmates in Aledo. As of May 1, Staley said, Cook County inmates are no longer being housed in Mercer County.

Board members learned two small unidentified counties had approached Mercer County about housing some of their inmates. Staley estimated doing so would improve the Mercer County facility's annual revenue by $200,000 to $250,000. Currently Mercer County receives $40 a day for an outside inmate.

The board also appropriated $30,800 in county aid to a bridge fund and $31,827 for a county engineer salary, and approved extending the county's line of credit at BankOrion to Sept. 1, with no increase in the amount.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
Repealing the Second Amendment would not in put an end to the right it was designed to protect ....

I didn’t notice your comments before, but they bear repeating and emphasizing. Whenever I hear someone say that the Second Amendment is what gives us the right to keep and bear arms I can only respond (at least in my mind) with, “Then you’d be okay with not having that right if the amendment were repealed—correct? And if someone lives where the U.S. Constitution doesn’t apply, then it’s okay that those people don’t have the right either—?”

As a distant relative of my wife pointed out back in 1803, “The right of self defence is the first law of nature,” and the same fundamental fact was stated by many others before and since. The “right” of self-defense is meaningless, however, without the right to possess and employ when necessary the effective means of self-defense, which today means guns. It would be no different than saying we have the right to a free press, but not the right to own presses or their modern equivalents such as computer printers.