Effort To Force Sanctuary Vote Fails In Norfolk, VA

When Democrats seized control of the state legislature, it was only a matter of time before the anti-gun laws came flying. Sure enough, they did, but they didn’t have quite the impact that folks like Gov. Ralph “Blackface” Northam intended.

Instead of being heralded throughout the state as the just culmination of whatever, more than 90 percent of the counties in the state passed sanctuary ordinances, clearly stating they won’t enforce such unconstitutional measures. To say that Northam and company are less than pleased would be an understatement.

Down in Norfolk, VA, gun rights advocates recently failed to force a vote on their own sanctuary measure. However, all is not lost on that front.

An effort by gun-rights advocates in Norfolk to force the City Council to consider a measure preventing staff from enforcing some state gun laws has failed to net enough signatures.

That means the ordinance pushed by advocates won’t appear on the City Council’s agenda any time soon, and there’s no public hearing scheduled on the matter

But that may not be the end of the effort.

Bob Brown, the chief petitioner and chairman of Norfolk’s Republican Party, said the group went to court seeking an injunction to extend the deadline for them to collect voter signatures, arguing coronavirus-related lockdowns had inhibited them from getting enough people to sign during the four-month period allowed by the city code. As of Thursday, a judge had not made a determination or set a date for any hearing.

Brown has a point, though. COVID-19 lockdowns kept a lot of people away from various places where petitions would normally be signed. There were no gun shows or anything of the sort, for example, nor was there a good time to go door-to-door. Gun stores were closed as well. In other words, Northam’s lockdown orders made it virtually impossible to garner enough signatures.

In a just world, the judge would rule in favor of the petitioners and extend the deadline.

Unfortunately, we don’t live in a particularly just world. I mean, Keeping Up With The Kardashians has gotten 18 seasons and Firefly only got half of one. Any world where that happens isn’t a just world. I’m just sayin’.

Anyway, because we don’t live in an inherently just world <insert grumbling about gorram Fox executives here>, there’s a chance the judge may decide that lockdown or not, the deadline is the deadline and he’s not extending it for anyone, regardless of the cause. It’s also possible that the judge just won’t do it because he thinks sanctuary ordinances are dumb or something. Who knows.

As such, no one should get their hopes up just yet.

However, I think the case is sound enough that a judge has to at least consider it. Our entire nation is hinged on rights such as being able to petition our government. If the government can shut that down with a simple order, then we have no real right to petition our government. As such, the deadline needs to be extended by at least as much time as is needed to counter the lockdown period.

Then, if advocates can’t get the signatures, so be it. At least then, though, we’d know there just wasn’t enough support for the measure, rather than the deck being stacked against it.