The Second Amendment Sanctuary City: a city where the mayor, council members and local law enforcement abide by the Constitution and follow the laws of the state and the nation. What a novelty.

At least they follow most of the laws. See, it’s also a city where the Second Amendment is interpreted as it was written and intended. Any and all weapons of personal self-defense are allowed in this city and the surrounding suburbs.

Residents of the Second Amendment Sanctuary City (SASC) are able to “Keep” arms and “Bear” them – carry openly or concealed in any public place or building they choose. Private businesses of course have the option of allowing weapons in their facilities or not. Naturally, any “no gun” business would likely not last long in the SASC. But still, it’s every private business owner’s right to follow his own conscience, just as it’s every customer’s right not to patronize said businesses.

No weapons that are intended to or likely to cause collateral damage are allowed. No grenades, no rocket launchers, cannons, claymores, bombs, etc. No weapons that can’t be carried, as in “Bear Arms,” are allowed.

But even with the protections, the SASC must be a sanctuary city. There are unconstitutional laws currently on the books, both federal and in most states – laws like requiring a permit to carry a weapon in a concealed fashion, or laws requiring a permit even to purchase a handgun, much less carry one.

And soon, it seems, the Republicans and the president will cave to the emotion-driven wants of the left by banning bump stocks and “strengthening” background checks. And keep a watch out for legislation having to do with the dreaded AR-15 – the scary yet relatively small-caliber rifle that is responsible for far fewer homicides than knives and fists.

Of course, all these new guns laws will be as unconstitutional as they will be ineffective, and thus will not be enforced in the SASC.

This raises the following questions about our hypothetical SASC:

How long do we think it would be before the left demands that the federal government get involved? How long would it be before they command the attorney general of the United States to act to shut down this so-called sanctuary city? A few hours? A day? A week?

How long would it be before the left demands the federal government cancel all funding that is presently allotted for this new sanctuary city, until it agrees to comply with current federal gun laws?

How long would it be before the left demands that local law enforcement cooperate with the feds when trying to find those who own items that have been outlawed, or obtained without the blessing of the government?

How long would it be before the left demands full compliance with all federal gun laws? They might say something like they’re “only asking to enforce current gun laws.”

And how long would it be before the left sees the irony or double standard of their actions? A few hours? A day? Never?

To the first “how long” question, I would guess no more than 24 hours. To the last, pertaining to the irony/double standard, I would guess never, at least not publicly.

As they demonstrate almost daily, the left is incapable of recognizing irony or hypocrisy.

And this is the point of the SASC scenario. There is no consistency to the left. The left would never tolerate an SASC, but use the same arguments against them regarding sanctuary cities for illegal aliens, and they are just fine with consistently thwarting the efforts of the federal authorities.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.