If only...

KrisAnne Hall is an actual lawyer so should have an understanding of the relationship of the government vs the citizen, and what that means for the right to keep and bear arms.  She writes about it at an Open Letter to Governors, Attorneys General, Legislators of these United States, and the People along with their Sheriffs and Peace Officers. I make the point that Ms. Hall is an actual attorney, rather than some schmuck who just reads the Constitution and somehow thinks it means what it says.  I also want to thank David Codrea of the War on Guns for bringing this to my attention.

Hall is here writing about the recently passed initiative 1639 in Washington State, and the more recent refusal to enforce it by a number of sheriffs throughout the state.  Apart from the arguments Hall makes, the sheriffs have more practical reasons for refusing to enforce the law.  But it turns out that refusing to enforce it is the right thing to do:

Proponents of Washington’s Initiative 1639 and those critical of the law enforcement officials cite a “duty to the Constitution” and to the “rule of law.” Yet in many respects these laws are built on the circumvention and abdication of the rule of law. The Constitution and its underlying principles define the rule of law. As such, “the rule of law” cannot be synonymous with “the will of the” majority, as Washington’s AG suggests, when the majority’s will advocates the suspension of due process and the revocation of a person’s natural rights (which all officials involved in this debate swore an oath to uphold.)

...snip...

The legislator with his delegated responsibility, cannot be exalted above the inherent rights of the individual which he is charged to protect. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because people have legislators who have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused people to entrust legislators with the power to make laws in the first place. So the justification “it was passed by the legislature,” does not and should not override an inherent individual right, even more so when the legislature is admonished by the Supreme Law to not infringe upon said right.

Ouch!

Please go read the entire piece.  It is logical and well written.  I wish the people in power would read it and take it to heart.  So much of our problems would be solved if more of our government officials humbly recognized the relationship laid out by Hall and acted upon it.