The Sierra County commissioners, without discussion, have approved a measure allowing themselves to block the implementation of state gun restrictions or anything else they believe is unconstitutional.
The unanimous vote came Tuesday morning after a scantily attended hearing in which two people, Patty Kearney and Debora Nicoll, opposed the ordinance in writing, and two others, Tammy Lane and Joseph R. Simpson, endorsed it in person.
The ordinance mentions only that the county “will not recognize nor enforce any State Law, Mandate or Order that violates or is contrary to, the provisions of the Enabling Act” — the Congressional law of 1910 that cleared the way for New Mexico to become a state in 1912.
But Sierra County’s ordinance, like one passed earlier in Valencia County, is aimed at Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s executive order restricting firearms in Albuquerque public areas and future gun-control laws from the New Mexico Legislature.
“People need to stand up to this tyranny because, if not, it’s going to get worse,” said Simpson of Caballo. “I’ve spoken to young voters and they say they are sick of it. These are people in their 20s. They’re afraid something is going to explode if something’s not done.”
Debora Nicoll, who writes for the Citizen, called the ordinance “a theft of more than a hundred years of progress. … There is a reason the framers of our constitution chose to set up systems of separate power with built-in checks and balances.”
Lane of Las Palomas thanked the commissioners. “We the people the last few years have really been under massive attack,” she said. “I think you’re doing a good thing. I know you’ve been attacked real hard.”
When I asked the three commissioners, during the public hearing, if they would explain how they intended to use this ordinance, they looked uneasily at the county attorney, Dave Pato, who said they were not obligated to answer questions. They remained silent, not even discussing the ordinance among themselves.
But Sheriff Joshua Baker, who favored the ordinance, made it clear it is to counter the governor’s gun order.
’It’s a resolution saying that in Sierra County we’re not going to enforce unconstitutional rules and mandates passed by the state government or sent down by the governor,” he said. “There’s never been a scarier time that we’re in right now with our public health orders being extended to our second amendment of the U.S. constitution and our state constitution and a governor who openly says nothing in the constitution [bans her order]. “She doesn’t even take her oath to be what she said it was,”
After the hearing, I spoke to Simpson and his wife Nancy about why they think the country is on the verge of civil war.
“It’s the way that they’re trying to abridge our constitution,” Joseph said.
By restricting guns?
“Everything,” he said. “Our rights. Our pursuit of happiness. Our freedom of speech.”
How is our freedom of speech abridged?
“You can’t really get up there and say what you want to say because what they’re doing, they’re taking it out of context.”
Who is?
“The government. The way we want to speak. We can’t speak freely. “
When I asked him what the government would stop him from saying, he thought for a second and turned to his wife and asked her. She suggested the mandatory closures during the COVID pandemic.
“The rules and regulations,” Joseph said. “They’re ruling us and mandating us so we can hardly do anything like when we were kids.”
Gov. Lujan Grisham’s order applies only to parks and other public areas of Albuquerque and does not apply to Sierra County. She originally issued it in September after series of shootings involving young people in Albuquerque. It is already under a series of challenges to its constitutionality.
This is the third time the Sierra County Commission has taken a symbolic action against gun control. In March 2020, the commission passed a resolution supporting then-sheriff Glenn Hamilton’s intention not to enforce the new “red flag law” allowing a judge to order one’s firearms seized if he is deemed a threat to himself or others. In February 2019, the commission declared the county a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County.”
Shame on you Sierra county. Your indifference has allowed the county commission to claim to be the judges of what laws are legal. I’m not a gambler but I’d lay a lot of money down that gun laws are not all they have in their sights.
With the first amendment now being questioned as the left has questioned the second for decades now; you ought to visit our great gun range here in T or C and meet some of the exceptionally friendly folks who frequent it. Have some meaningful conversations instead of living in a narrow minded echo chamber of “central control”. Hegel and Kant spiritually were off base, and our Constitutional Fathers and American Transcendentalists hit home runs for the common man who lives in a flyover State.
Acts like this by “our” county commissioners AND attitudes like those of Ms. Lane and Mr. & Mrs. Simpson are why we pretty much don’t go to group gatherings and we minimize our presence in the community except for essential shopping, etc. To the best of my knowledge, NONE of our three county commissioners are experts on constitutional law, so I’m NOT sure I trust them to know what’s “constitutional” and what isn’t. And I’m pretty sure Sheriff Baker is likewise not a legal expert. All my life, until past several years, I believed that it’s the responsibility of law enforcement personnel (AND elected officials) to enforce and abide by public laws/statutes. NOT to revise on the fly as it suits them….
I seem to recall that the Nuremberg trials determined that simply “following the orders” was never justification for actions later considered to be illegal. Claiming that one has to be a constitutional scholar in order to refuse to enforce a seemingly obviously unconstitutional order appears to be following the mindset of those on trial at Nuremberg who were not international legal scholars, but were still held accountable for their actions. Unlike many, I would prefer to err on the side of the Constitution.
It’s all good–we’ll happily stay home with OUR firearms. And avoid all but essential shopping, since some folks think they NEED to be armed to buy milk or take their kids to a park. IMHO, you’re doing an apples/oranges comparison. THINK about what was on trial at Nuremberg. Not at all the same.
Val TwoWolves, I would be happier if I could agree with you. The book, DEATH BY GOVERNMENT by David Rummel documents millions killed by their governments after being disarmed. He is not some nut job but rather a professor at University of Hawaii. In my own case, many of my Jewish relatives fled Europe after the laws forcing disarmament for “public safety”. Those who remained are no more. The website JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP documents this history as do the Nuremberg trials. A similar story from my Ukrainian relatives is told after Stalin disarmed them after World War Two. IMHO, there also seems to be a few parallels with the history of this country and the original inhabitants. Until people start caring about our planet and neighbors, we will continue to have these problems. Best wishes for Holiday Season.
WHO is wanting to totally disarm US? Specifics, please. There’s a BIG difference between a directive that in one county, people are disallowed from carrying firearms in public parks and playgrounds and going door to door picking up ALL of peoples firearms. We are absolutely gun owners, yet somehow we manage to buy milk, go to Walmart, etc., without feeling the necessity to be armed while we’re doing so. Stalin did at least as much damage in Ukraine by convincing a core group of people to join the collectives, and then he starved them to death. Same kind of damage was done by wealthy English landowners in Ireland. I figured out a LONG time ago that if I get into a firefight w/ my government, the piddly little number of weapons we own isn’t gonna protect me/us from the tanks and similar BIG firepower that said gov’t’s trained military will bring to the fight. Maybe a little better than the proverbial “don’t bring a knife to a gunfight” but not much. I wish you the very best of Holidays as well.
I believe that the US Constitution created a judicial branch of government which decides on the constitutionality of any law in the land. I think you will agree with me that the County Commissioners are not the judiciary in this county. So, wouldn’t you say that the Commission has passed an unconstitutional law appointing themselves the body to decide on issues of constitutionality? It seems, therefore, that they very cleverly played a trick on us by making it impossible for them to act on their own law. Nice bunch of jokers.