Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Washington state: at least 20 county sheriffs refuse to enforce new gun laws [View all]meadowlander
(4,397 posts)94. You can't judge the legitimacy of conscience objection outside of the context
of what that objection is about. Where the law you're objecting too is actually immoral, it is justified. Where it isn't, it isn't.
Objecting to draconian drug laws that destroy families needlessly - legit.
Objecting to gun safety laws - catch yourself on.
See also: county clerks that refuse to marry LGBTQ couples; bakers who refuse to bake cakes for LGBTQ couples; pharmacists who refuse to sell birth control, etc.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
108 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Washington state: at least 20 county sheriffs refuse to enforce new gun laws [View all]
mysteryowl
Feb 2019
OP
Republicans only obey the law if they choose to do so. They have a special previlege. You don't.
olegramps
Feb 2019
#49
What they are refusing to enforce, according to the article is "I1639", a state-passed
Atticus
Feb 2019
#10
No problem. The article isn't very clear as to just what the "ballot measure" accomplished. nt
Atticus
Feb 2019
#13
DU was a lot more enthusiastic about sheriffs who refused to enforce marijuana laws (nt)
Recursion
Feb 2019
#16
The law is the law though. We're not supposed to pick and choose only the ones we like.
oldsoftie
Feb 2019
#41
You can't judge the legitimacy of conscience objection outside of the context
meadowlander
Feb 2019
#94
and this effing sux...the state AG has said if a crime is committed in our county...
samnsara
Feb 2019
#18
This is true, I have seen law inforcement organizations come out against any regulations that
yaesu
Feb 2019
#59
Actually, Arpaio, scumbag that he was, was big on enforcing existing laws, while
LongtimeAZDem
Feb 2019
#91
That description makes the law ridiculous; even outlawing simple deer rifles.
oldsoftie
Feb 2019
#42
I support the ban on assault weapons but pragmatically, how will this be enforced?
jalan48
Feb 2019
#45
I guess I would need to see the voting breakdown in these areas. I'll try and find something online.
jalan48
Feb 2019
#48
lived in WA for a year and what I found with regard to the Sheriffs is that they
2naSalit
Feb 2019
#47
As I posted above, the rural sheriff's live in the small communities they have to police.
jalan48
Feb 2019
#60
This is not a national law, it's a state law. My question is how can/does the state enforce it?
jalan48
Feb 2019
#70
I understand, but from a practical standpoint who will enforce the law in these small rural towns?
jalan48
Feb 2019
#72
I think it's unenforceable. Without a national law the state will be chasing it's tail.
jalan48
Feb 2019
#76
I'm thinking mostly about those jerks that came out in support of Cliven Bundy and took over that
PatrickforO
Feb 2019
#89
It won't bring civil war, but enough people will die that the rest of the people will freak out
Calista241
Feb 2019
#61
Many applauded when Arizona Sheriff Dupink refused to enforce anti-immigrant laws
LongtimeAZDem
Feb 2019
#57
LOL, constitutionalists far right, survivalist, racist whackjobs and grifters.
Thomas Hurt
Feb 2019
#101
"NC sheriffs now oppose mandate to help ICE - but it's closer to becoming law"
friendly_iconoclast
Apr 2019
#107