Commissioners discuss gun rights sanctuary resolution

The Dubois County Commissioners were approached by a county resident to consider making a statement against any gun laws that could violate the Second Amendment to the Constitution.

Members of the grassroots group of gun owners, supporters, and enthusiasts attached to the Dubois County 2A United Sanctuary Movement have made two appearances at commissioners’ meetings asking for the county to create a resolution declaring the county a Second Amendment Sanctuary. The process began prior to the beginning of the pandemic and stalled out as the emergency caused by Covid-19 disrupted some county functions.

The movement has been spreading across the country due to fears of the potential infringement of gun owners’ rights.

“A 2A sanctuary county is a county that has adopted laws and resolutions that oppose, prohibit, or impede the enforcement of certain gun control measures,” Eric Jochim told the commissioners Monday. “Proponents of such sanctuary laws or resolutions contend that various gun laws are a violation of the rights guaranteed within the Second Amendment.”

Jochim stated that firearm ownership has come under some heavy scrutiny with threats of executive orders and potential new federal laws being considered by the U.S. Congress. He presented the commissioners with a map showing the spreading number of counties adopting resolutions in Indiana and neighboring states.

“We have an opportunity today to protect our 14,000 residents (gun owners) and future gun owners in Dubois County,” Jochim said. “Let’s protect our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms.”

The response from the commissioners was mixed. They admitted that a resolution would not supercede state or federal laws.

“I don’t think this does anything other than make a statement,” Commissioner Chad Blessinger said. “It says we support gun owners, we support gun rights and we support the Second Amendment. That is about as far as it goes.”

Jochim said he could provide documentation of Supreme Court decisions supporting the county’s right to protect the Constitutional rights of its citizens.

Commissioner Elmer Brames agreed with Blessinger that the resolution wouldn’t do much beyond making a statement. “We would not ask our law enforcement to ignore state law,” he said.

Jochim said he would like to see Indiana make the entire state a 2A sanctuary.

Commissioner Nick Hostetter supports the resolution. “I would like to see Dubois County do this,” he said. “I think we should send this message that we are not going to go against the United States Constitution.”

Blessinger said he would consider the resolution. “I also support the First Amendment. Should we have a resolution saying we support the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment, the Fourteenth,” he asked. “I guess I don’t really have any opposition to it and we can look into it a little further.”

Brames asked if Jochim wanted the county to oppose all gun regulation.

“I do not want to change the laws as they are today,” Jochim said. “I believe in background checks. I also don’t believe everyone should have a machine gun or suppressor. I am not a radical by any means.”

He said he opposes a proposed Congressional bill limiting the size of ammunition to less than .50 caliber and making it illegal for individuals to purchase firearms as a gift. “I want to be able to purchase a .22 for my son,” Jochim said. “I want to be able to have a 12 gauge in my house.”

Jochim is referring to Sabika Sheikh Firearm Licensing and Registration Act (H.R. 127). The bill generally prohibits and penalizes the possession of a firearm or ammunition unless the individual complies with licensing and registration requirements. Certain size magazines and firearms would also be subject to additional taxes. Further, it prohibits the transfer of a firearm or ammunition to an unlicensed person.

Blessinger said he would have the county’s legal counsel review a resolution and consider it at a future meeting.

This story has been updated to clarify Commissioner Blessinger’s statement on the First, Fourth, and 14th Amendments. The reporter didn’t catch his statement correctly but after review of the video of the meeting, determined that he actually stated the word “should” before continuing his statement.