# Just when you think there's no hope for New England



## Real Old Man (Aug 17, 2015)

In the same general manner as the Gaspee Incident, the deplorables and patriots have spoken loud and clear

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...island-towns-declare-2nd-amendment-sanctuary/


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

That will end just as soon as the state cuts off funds.

Like peeing in your pants in a dark room. It gives you a warm feeling, but no one notices.


----------



## Camel923 (Aug 13, 2014)

We will see. Sanctuary cities stay eligible for state and federal funds when it comes to illegal aliens. Why not so with the second amendment? There is legal president. I say we need more such opposition to libtardia.


----------



## bigwheel (Sep 22, 2014)

Real Old Man said:


> In the same general manner as the Gaspee Incident, the deplorables and patriots have spoken loud and clear
> 
> https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...island-towns-declare-2nd-amendment-sanctuary/


Wow...what great news. There are a bunch of pro 2A folks in Noo Hampsha too. Hopefully this trend might just spread amongst a lot of yankee hick towns. Sure the liberals will call it racist since black folks get to feel the pain of taking a round..more often that whiteys..speaking per capita of course.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Camel923 said:


> We will see. Sanctuary cities stay eligible for state and federal funds when it comes to illegal aliens. Why not so with the second amendment? There is legal president. I say we need more such opposition to libtardia.


Yes, we do need more opposition to leftists. Where it could do some good.
But, I still maintain that a gesture like this is meaningless in a Leftist state, because the elected officials will simply twist the laws however they want. And they will shop around for leftist judges who will back them up. Oh, they might get overturned by the Supreme Court. In 3 or 4 years. IF the supremes even decide to hear the case.


----------



## Maine-Marine (Mar 7, 2014)

said it before I will say it gain... most important vote you cast is for the county sheriff...!!!


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> Yes, we do need more opposition to leftists. Where it could do some good.
> But, I still maintain that a gesture like this is meaningless in a Leftist state, because the elected officials will simply twist the laws however they want. And they will shop around for leftist judges who will back them up. Oh, they might get overturned by the Supreme Court. In 3 or 4 years. IF the supremes even decide to hear the case.


A leftist judge never sees the case if upstanding right-protecting law enforcement never arrests, and DAs never file charges.
As @Maine-Marine alluded to, pick the right people at the bottom of the chain, and you never have to worry about the top.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> A leftist judge never sees the case if upstanding right-protecting law enforcement never arrests, and DAs never file charges.
> As @Maine-Marine alluded to, pick the right people at the bottom of the chain, and you never have to worry about the top.


That is problematic when the legislature and governor are leftists. And the vast majority of the population is too.
I find it highly ironic that the cradle of liberty in this country, New England, is today against freedom and liberty.
And worst of all, when the citizens of these socialistic states retire, they move South and bring their stinking politics with them.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> That is problematic when the legislature and governor are leftists. And the vast majority of the population is too.
> I find it highly ironic that the cradle of liberty in this country, New England, is today against freedom and liberty.
> And worst of all, when the citizens of these socialistic states retire, they move South and bring their stinking politics with them.


Neither the legislature nor governor pick the sheriff.


----------



## rice paddy daddy (Jul 17, 2012)

Kauboy said:


> Neither the legislature nor governor pick the sheriff.


I don't believe you are grasping the concept here. Sheriff has nothing to do with this.
Town votes itself a "2nd Amendment sanctuary". State says, "OK. But we will withhold all state funds possible from your town."
Town sues. State continues to withhold funds pending resolution in court.
Town is going bankrupt waiting for court resolution, finally has to either (a) rescind original vote, or (b) dissolve as a town. Either way, state wins, gun owners lose.


----------



## Kauboy (May 12, 2014)

rice paddy daddy said:


> I don't believe you are grasping the concept here. Sheriff has nothing to do with this.
> Town votes itself a "2nd Amendment sanctuary". State says, "OK. But we will withhold all state funds possible from your town."
> Town sues. State continues to withhold funds pending resolution in court.
> Town is going bankrupt waiting for court resolution, finally has to either (a) rescind original vote, or (b) dissolve as a town. Either way, state wins, gun owners lose.


Mighty tall assumptions you're throwing around there.
What you're proposing is EXACTLY the kind of action that will start a massive wave of other towns passing the same vote, and, to top if off, the people can stop filing state income tax in protest. When 50% of the state passes the law and withholds taxes, we'll see who bleeds out first.
When state authorities come a-knockin', the locally elected shire reef can turn them away with their tails betwixt their legs.

That, or a massive outflow of citizens, again leading to a massive drop in state income.
Either way, it's a lose for the state that deserves it anyways for violating a civil right.

If the state really wants that fight, boy oh boy, that is the worst way they could possibly get it.

Right is right, and worth the fight.


----------

