U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- On Thursday, 16 July, 2020, the Wisconsin Sawyer County Board adopted a resolution supporting the United States Second Amendment and the Wisconsin Constitution’s Section 25, which protects the right to keep and bear arms.
The resolution stops short of the Sanctuary County movement, but it gives affirmative notice of the County’s support for Constitutional rights.
Full disclosure: I grew up in Sawyer County, Wisconsin, and have numerous close family members who still live there.
Rural Wisconsin has a strong gun culture. I was not surprised to learn the resolution had passed.
A tip of the hat is deserved by Sawyer County Record staff reporter Frank Zufall. The article he wrote is the epitome of good reporting. It has the dates, places, people involved, what they said, who was for and against, and voting records. Here is an example, from the article:
Tish Keahna, a lawyer who lives in Hayward, said she was asked by a county employee signing up those who wanted to make public comments, whether she was “for or against the Second Amendment,” a question, she said, that was “disingenuous” and framed the discussion as a “political issue” on the Second Amendment and not the county’s resolution.
She also questioned why the county was devoting time to this issue when there were more pressing maters, and she added it was outside of the duty of law enforcement officers to interpret constitutional law because under it is the domain of the courts.
Frank Zufall’s article is so well done, as an example of objective reporting, it is difficult to determine whether he is on either side of the issue.
To place the resolution in context, consider the “framing” that Tish Keahna attempted to do, as reported.
First, she attempts so declare discussions of the Second Amendment as a political issue, as invalid.
Second, she claims the resolution is not worthy of the County Board’s time.
What would be more worthy of the Board’s time than protecting the Constitutional rights of the residents of Sawyer County?
Third, she claims that law enforcement officers have no duty to interpret Constitutional law.
Why, then do law enforcement officers take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and not to simply obey the dictates of the Courts? Taking an oath to uphold the Constitution implies a duty to interpret the Constitution, to study it, and to understand how it is to be upheld. In the United States, merely “following orders” is not a sufficient defense.
In the article by Frank Zufall Thomas Vitcenda made the statement:
“I don’t believe this resolution is necessary because the right to keep and bear arms is already well established in the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions,”
As an observer of the Wisconsin political scene about the right to arms, the record shows Vitcenda’s belief to be misquided.
Wisconsin added the clear wording of Section 25 to the Wisconsin Constitution in 1998.
Text of Section 25:
Right to Keep and Bear Arms
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.
The far left Wisconsin Supreme Court took considerable pains to gut the amendment and render it nearly toothless. Since then, Wisconsin has replaced several of the far-left justices. At least one prosecutor was careful not to allow a test case to the Supreme Court, which would likely have reversed the previous ruling.
The right to keep and bear arms has been under serious attack in Wisconsin for decades. Current Democrat Governor Evers has shown a desire to infringe on the right by statute. He has supported “red flag laws” and requirements for state approval of private sales (universal background checks).
Second Amendment supporters have learned their freedoms require constant vigilance to maintain.
The sanctuary county movement, and resolutions like the one supported by the Sawyer County board, are needed to prevent erosion of the rights regained in the last two decades.
Without the Internet and independent sources such as Ammoland, Second Amendment supporters would not hear of resolutions such as that passed by Sawyer County. The Sanctuary County movement would have fizzled out, because stories about it would have been spiked by the old, dominant, progressive media.
Those days are gone. The old dominant media now pushes for censorship and government funding of the media. Their political agenda has been noticed by most Americans.
Will we restore a Constitutional Republic, or form a Socialist and Racial people’s Republic, similar to Cuba or Venezuela?
We are in the process of finding out.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.