Oregon Court Rules Sheriffs’ Refusal To Enforce Anti-Gun Laws Is ‘Racist,’ Embraces ‘White Nationalism’
BY Herschel Smith
1 year, 9 months ago
An Oregon judge ruled Wednesday that local governments can not declare themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries, further saying that the sheriffs that implemented a Second Amendment ordinance were embracing “racist and white nationalist ideologies.”
Chief Judge Jim Egan of the Oregon Court of Appeals ruled that the sheriffs did not have the authority to create sanctuaries that “create a ‘patchwork quilt’ of firearms laws in Oregon,” further saying that the sheriffs‘ arguments go in the “dustbin,” according to the ruling. Sheriffs in Oregon began to introduce Second Amendment sanctuaries after Oregon passed Ballot Measure 114, which requires background checks, firearm training, fingerprint collection and a permit to purchase any firearm.
“The arguments propounding unfettered access to guns, ammunitions, and implements of destruction give rise to waging of war on government because the proponents believe that our government is infected by those they hate,” Egan wrote. “As a judge, sworn to uphold the Oregon Constitution and the United States Constitution, I cannot stand by without identifying the origins of that argument, and the origins of the Ordinance. The history of white supremacist ideology in this country is older than the United States Constitution.”
Egan accused the Sheriffs’ counsel of alluding to conspiracy theories about the United Nations (UN), saying that their belief that the UN will impose mandates that will require the state and local government to disarm the American public in violation of the Second Amendment is false, according to the ruling.
“In other words, Intervenors came before this court and referenced UN mandates, which, as explained below, is a well-documented trope meant to invoke white supremacist, antisemitic fear of a takeover of our country by outsiders and minorities who are manipulated by an elite class of supervillains,” Egan wrote.
Gun Owners of America (GOA), who backed the sanctuaries, “forcefully” denied the characterization of their argument, according to Fox News.
Fox News remarks that “The Court of Appeals ruling marks the first major legal defeat for the Second Amendment sanctuary movement.”
Oh goodness, I think this is being over-dramatized a wee bit, don’t you? Nobody who advocated 2A sanctuary counties ever believed that this would all go peacefully into the night and go down without a fight.
Read the opinion of judge J. Egan, whomever that is and for what it’s worth. It reads like a freshman paper for sociology 101 at a local yokel community college. It really isn’t worthy of the time to fisk it.
Here is what you do with rulings like this. You don’t respond because that gives the ruling publicity it doesn’t deserve. You ignore it. If pressed, you ask the judiciary where they’re going to get law enforcement to enforce their ruling?
The Sheriffs are elected. They are elected to keep the peace, leave peaceable men alone to their pursuits, and honor the oaths they swore to obey the constitution and laws of God. They don’t have to enforce any laws that break that covenant.
The judge can go pound sand. He’s just a carnival barker.
On February 17, 2023 at 8:43 am, Joe Blow said:
Its funny… well, in a morbid way.
I read, a lot. Firehose, sort it out on the back end over a budweiser….
This subject is one we have all been dancing around. It comes down to interpretation, a difference of opinion on ancillary matters. Follow me here, when he says:
“The arguments propounding unfettered access to guns, ammunitions, and implements of destruction give rise to waging of war on government because the proponents believe that our government is infected by those they hate,” Egan wrote
He is not wrong.
No really, remove your thoughts, feelings, and opinions from everything. Factually speaking, are the people in this country arguing against gun control measures, also arguing there are serious misgivings about our government? Yes, yes those are the same groups of people, there is overlap. The fact that the latter is responsible for the former is where the problem arises, but we don’t fight that fight….
He is not wrong people, in his opinion of the facts, as a person sworn to defend the laws and government of this nation, he is not wrong! The people that fight against gun control (thats us!) want the fed gov gone (yep, us too)! So his statementnis factually correct and in his interpretation, he is the good guy!
THATS WHERE OUR FIGHT LIES!!!!
Don’t argue one whit about gun control, its aaallllll unconstitutional! Argue about why we need a nation of free people who have access to guns. THAT is the fight that will win. This BS about magazine size, barrel length, etc. etc., etc. is all a DISTRACTION from your real fight. Does anyone argue that the 2nd ammendment was instituted to defend against a tyrannical government (and then point out that is exactly whats going on)? No, we dig our heels in and say you can’t have my 30 round magazine (while conceding on a different point like bump stocks or arm braces). We are losing the fight because we’re fighting the wrong enemy. They have divided us, and are conquering.
On February 17, 2023 at 7:07 pm, luke2236 said:
They act like White Nationalism is a bad thing…
The Founders didnt think so. Nor do I.
On February 17, 2023 at 7:35 pm, PGF said:
The judge sure does loudly protest things that are not in contention within the scope of the sherrifs decisions. It’s almost as if he protests too much and confirms some conspiracies.
On February 18, 2023 at 1:08 am, Dan said:
Now lets see this assclown of a judge address ‘sanctuary cities’ and illegal alien invaders.
On February 18, 2023 at 1:21 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ luke2236
Pertaining to your comment, the great political philosopher and longshoreman (yes, that’s what he did as his day job… he worked for a living) Eric Hoffer said in his book about mass movements “The True Believers,” that mass ideological movements can arise and function without any sort of god, but not without a devil, i.e., an enemy upon which to focus the wrath of its members.
“White nationalism” is just the latest in a long series of monsters under the bed that frighten the leftists when they turn out the light to try to go to sleep. They like “white privilege” a lot lately as well. If you had a dollar for every time the NY Times or one of the other organs of the deep-state propaganda apparatus used those terms, you’d have a nice big pile of dough, let me tell you.
The left likes to call names and hurl insults, and periodically they need to replace their worn-out epithets, insults and labels with new ones. Sexist, Intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist, bigoted.
Hey they forget imperialist and hater!!
After a while, you just have to laugh at these clowns. So I do…. and it is high time others do so as well. Alinsky wrote in his guide “Rules for Radicals” that ridicule is a weapon against which it is very hard to defend, and it is high time that those folks got a dose of their own medicine.
There was a time when I was young and maybe a bit naive, when being accused of one of these “sins” would have horrified me… but those days are long past. Coming from a lefty, any one of those insults is to be worn as a badge of honor.
As the boys during WW2 used to say “If you aren’t taking flak, you’re not over the target…”
On February 18, 2023 at 1:30 am, Georgiaboy61 said:
@ luke2236
Oh, and one other point pertaining to identity politics. When the left hurls those phrases intended to be insults, such as “white nationalism” or “white privilege,” they are engaging in identity politics, but with the aim of preventing people of European ancestry a.k.a. whites, from exercising their rights as an identity group.
I have told people many times and will continue to do so that identity politics is an idiotic way to run a country and a society. However, if identity politics is in fact to be the coin of the realm, then everyone – every identity group – must be permitted to play the game by the same rules everyone else gets to use.
That’s not what is happening now, though: The cultural marxists are all for identity politics when it favors their privileged groups (Muslims, feminist women, LGBTs, blacks, Latinos, etc.), but they grown outraged when their foes want to play the game. That in turn tells us that their real objective isn’t to build a society in which all are equal under the multicultural umbrella, but to create a sort of inverted apartheid society in which privileged identity groups are on top and Europeans (whites) are on the bottom.
Further evidence that this is their end-game is seen in hard left states like New York and other leftist strongholds. They even formed a so-called “truth and reconciliation” commission, named precisely in the same manner as the one in South Africa. They’re running plays out of the same (communist) playbook they used over there.
On February 18, 2023 at 1:58 pm, Jack Crabb said:
Judge Egan, the magic black-robed asshat, can just FOAD. Or he’s welcome to EABODADIAF. Asshat’s choice.
On February 18, 2023 at 2:12 pm, Elmo said:
David Codrea’s take on this decision:
“With judges adopting Antifa’s rhetoric, can communist ‘people’s courts’ for counterrevolutionaries be far off?”
Nailed it. As he always does.
On February 18, 2023 at 2:34 pm, Paul B said:
Some one is working towards a civil war and does not realize how terrible that is.
On February 18, 2023 at 6:18 pm, Jack Crabb said:
I’d rather a civil war than a communist government. But it may be too late…