Mohave County Becomes Second Amendment Sanctuary County

gosar mohave county
U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar addresses the Mohave County Board of Supervisors

On Monday, November 4, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously in favor of a resolution making Mohave County a 2nd Amendment sanctuary county. State Representative Leo Biasiucci and State Senator Sonny Borrelli joined U.S. Congressman Paul Gosar at the meeting in support of the resolution.

“While we’re voting on this here, they are voting on whether to become a ‘sanctuary city’ for illegal immigration,” said Supervisor Hildy Angius referring to the residents of Tucson. “Everyone will understand what we meant to do here today.”

“The Board affirms its support of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and declares Mohave County a Second Amendment Sanctuary County,” the Resolution stated. “This Board will not authorize or appropriate government funds, resources, employees, agencies, contractors, buildings, detention centers or offices for the purpose of enforcing laws that unconstitutionally infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms.”

“This resolution sends a great message to others in Arizona and across the country that Mohave County will always fight to defend our constitutional rights,” said Representative Biasiucci. “I am proud to represent this district, and I will never stop defending our 2nd Amendment at the state level.”

“Although this is symbolic in nature, this reaffirms the county’s commitment, as well as mine, to support and defend the U.S. and Arizona constitutions,” said Senator Borrelli.

Angius, the District 2 Supervisor from Bullhead City said she hopes other counties will adopt similar resolutions.

“There is traction to implement gun control laws, even here in Arizona,” Angius said. “I refuse to let that happen here in Mohave County without a fight.”

According to Angius, the resolution makes clear Mohave County’s commitment to Constitutional provisions.

About ADI Staff Reporter 239 Articles
Under the leadership of ADI Editor In Chief Huey Freeman, our team of staff reporters work tirelessly to bring the latest, most accurate news to our readers.

5 Comments

  1. Thank u Thank u…we feel the same way in Vegas . Time to move out ! ppl should not come here to gamble n throw thier money away ! Every state should follow Arizona , period !

  2. Exactly, Flappy. A real ‘sanctuary’ law would openly defy existing state or federal gun laws, and then prevent local LEOs, employers or FFL dealers from cooperating with or sharing their databases or records with FBI or ATF, even proximate to a gun-related crime.

    Could you imagine if ATF sent out a trace request on a weapon recovered at a crime scene in that county, or if some local machinist was making and distributing drop-in full-auto sears for various semi-autos that have movable but dummy selector switches where the ‘A’ setting does nothing – and then the locals told the FEDs to go pound sand? ? THAT would be the equivalent of what the illegal immigrant support community is doing with border control officers in their so-called ‘sanctuaries.’

  3. Thank God Prop 205 in Tucson got crushed. I heard Mr Elias on Buckmaster yesterday say it was unfortunate that the “heavys” came in at the last moment to defeat the Proposition…what an a__hole.

    Remember the COT tried to pass an ordinance to destroy any and all seized or donated firearms? Welcome to Liberal land Tuscon!

    The current Council, the new Mayor, and the majority of the BOS won’t give up until all provisions of SB 1070 are abolished.

  4. Daily Independent, I am very sorry to see you twist the facts here. There is an important statement by Hildy Angius that you seemed to miss out on:

    “(The resolution) is nothing legally binding, it’s a statement by a government entity about something we feel strongly about. It’s not a law or an ordinance – it’s a resolution of support… if it ever gets to the point where the courts would have to get involved because of gun laws implemented by the feds or the state, we would step up and fight them.”

    This act by the BoS has no teeth whatsoever. It is has no legal binding at all, and in effect it is meaningless. In a nutshell, it just means that if “the courts” strike down a gun control law as unconstitutional, they will make sure it isn’t enforced. This is so useless, it can barely constitute a “sanctuary county” measure at all.

    Real immigration sanctuary laws are not just resolutions; they are laws with teeth. They define exactly what laws they don’t want enforced and *actually have legal force* within that jurisdiction.

    Non-binding resolutions are not bad in themselves. But Daily Independent is mis-characterizing them as something they are not. This is important stuff to understand; if you really want a gun sanctuary city, county, or State, you need *teeth* in strong, well-defined laws.

Comments are closed.