Wisconsin “Second Amendment sanctuary”

Thanks for the heads-up. Sometimes there's so much "stuff" going on elsewhere that one misses what's going on locally.

@Thomasss - do you happen to have the Senate and Assembly bill numbers? I tried using the search function on the state legislature website and couldn't find them. Thanks...

Doesn't matter. On this forum states have no rights and a sanctuary city or state for anything is an illusion.
Bow to you federal overlords.

milsurpguy said:

On this forum states have no rights

Click to expand...

Patently untrue.
The Legal Forum recognizes the sovereignty of States, and does so repeatedly.
It also recognized that States must needs be subject to the Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land.

Asserting otherwise is unproductive.

milsurpguy said:

Doesn't matter. On this forum states have no rights and a sanctuary city or state for anything is an illusion.
Bow to you federal overlords.

Click to expand...

As CapnMac states - Patently untrue. Just remember the Ninth and Tenth Amendments of the Bill of Rights. The problem there is that the federal (feral) government has been insinuating itself in areas they don't actually belong, usurping powers they are technically denied.

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

Click to expand...

milsurpguy said:

a sanctuary city or state for anything is an illusion.

Click to expand...

Well, let's examine that.
To be a "sanctuary polity" involves a political declaration that violations of Federal Law, from great to small, will be ignored for political reasons. Political expediency oft reeks more of illusion than substance.

Seldom are these things pitched as a reasonable decision by a given Executive branch that the burden of enforcing Federal rules on top of State and Local ones is an unreasonable burden. A situation that ought also involve Legislative input as well.

All of which is often more egregious for the self-same polity still cashing Federal checks for Law Enforcement.

The Legal forum here is dedicated to the concrete letter of the law and actual jurisprudence. What is rather than what we might wish to be.

I understood sanctuary status meant the local legal authority would not aid in the enforcement of gun laws they deemed unconstitutional. Doesn’t mean the ATF has to worry about
armed resistance to their efforts buy the locals.

This is the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel online account of the Assembly bill: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news...p-second-amendment-sanctuary-bill/7618509002/

This is a link to the bill's status page: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/proposals/reg/asm/bill/ab293

This is a link to the bill's text: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/related/proposals/ab293

What's the next step in Wisconsin?

lilguy said:

I understood sanctuary status meant the local legal authority would not aid in the enforcement of gun laws they deemed unconstitutional.

Click to expand...

…which they otherwise wouldn’t be required to do prior to a ‘sanctuary’ declaration.

The notion of a Second Amendment ‘sanctuary’ state is political theater, the stuff of partisan politics.

old lady new shooter said:

What's the next step in Wisconsin?

Click to expand...

It's in the Senate as SB.314, has been reported out of committee with a "yea" recommendation, and is awaiting being placed on the Senate schedule.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/proposals/sb314

As soon as the senate approves it our governor will promptly veto it.

It seems like at a state and national level lately, politics comes down to introducing proposals that are completely non-winnable to irritate the other side of the aisle. Our problems in Wisconsin is shared by many states; the capital is an enclave of radical liberalism that dictates to the rest of the sensible population.

Political theater not withstanding I’d like to see the counties and states pound large signs on all inbound highways and secondary roads advising out of region traffic that they’re entering a 2nd Amendment Sanctuary Zone.

If for no other reason than to advise potential non 2A supporters of that fact. In the hopes it may keep a few of them moving to perceived friendlier environs more in line with their political ideals as they evacuate their previous state in search of greener pastures.

However, if such signs convince the naive that they are protected from Federal law, that would be a downside. We have the precedents mentioned above of folks thinking they 'were protected' and they weren't.

Let's not go to denouncing folks or politics.

No denouncing of folks or politics intended. I see it more as a public service announcement for those that are unaware of a specific culture being embraced by the majority of the people in the area/region. There are a lot of regional peculiarities to specific areas in the US. 2A is a hot topic button and before somebody drops $450K+ on a house in a county or state that info may make or break a decision to buy.

I doubt folks wanting to move have 'sanctuary' status as a major concern. If a person who is a gun enthusiast, rights believer, etc. hasn't figure that out about an area, that' pretty pathetic that they need a road sign.

Well that devolved quickly. Civility as mentioned in another thread does appear to be in short supply depending on who you encounter at the moderator end of this site. Please inactivate my account.

If not agreeing with you, is devolving - feel free to leave.

GEM said:

I doubt folks wanting to move have 'sanctuary' status as a major concern.

Click to expand...

You may be correct on that point, but it may be an indicator of more major issues that are more highly motivating.

As one Wisconsinite of 40+ years, I would pull up and move to a more "free" state if there weren't other personal issues holding me here.

That's true but we are wandering.

wiscoaster said:

It's in the Senate as SB.314, has been reported out of committee with a "yea" recommendation, and is awaiting being placed on the Senate schedule.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2021/proposals/sb314

Click to expand...

Thanks.

jak67429 said:

As soon as the senate approves it our governor will promptly veto it.

Click to expand...

Are there enough in favor to override a veto?

Frulk said:

No denouncing of folks or politics intended. I see it more as a public service announcement for those that are unaware of a specific culture being embraced by the majority of the people in the area/region. There are a lot of regional peculiarities to specific areas in the US. 2A is a hot topic button and before somebody drops $450K+ on a house in a county or state that info may make or break a decision to buy.

Click to expand...

I was born and raised in California and lived there all my life except for three years in the early 70''s. Over the years it became a very different place. In researching where I wanted to move to, gun rights were a major factor in my decision. I ended up picking Arizona, which for some years now has been determined to be the most gun-friendly state in the country, and also met my other most important criteria, notably weather. I've been here three years now and every day am thankful I live here.