Oklahoma Senator Nathan Dahm
Oklahoma state Sen. Nathan Dahm, R-Broken Arrow (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki)
Previous Post
Next Post

“A lot of how the feds try to implement these things is through local law enforcement, [whether] it’s county sheriffs, local police departments, and they try to attach funding to that to force those cities and counties to do that. So what we could do is make sure that those cities and counties don’t accept any federal funding to implement any gun control measures,” he said.

Backers of Biden’s plan call [Oklahoma State Senator Nathan] Dahm’s measures unconstitutional.

“He is known for being an extremist. As a senator, he has proposed unconstitutional legislation and that’s what this feels like right now. Frankly, it feels like a political ploy. He wants attention because the president he supported just recently lost,” said Cacky Poarch with Moms Demand Action.

– Aaron Brilbeck in Republican State Lawmaker Proposes Plan To Make Okla. A Second Amendment Sanctuary State

Previous Post
Next Post


  1. The demotators call him an extremist for supporting the constitution – what does that tell you about the demotators? 🤬

    • That negotiations of any kind is over. We should focus on fortifying what rights we have going into the future. Regaining rights is one thing, defending what we have on the state level and sticking it to the feds under a Biden pres. is a possible thing.

    • Yeah my first thought was that would be a good name for a gay porn star. It isn’t a trans is it?

      • In this election map, why is Nebraska wearing blue and red stripes, instead of all red?

        • Nebraska and Maine award their Electoral votes by Congressional District. This sometimes splits their Electoral Vote between the candidates, as happening this year. If you click on the state, it takes you to a page with the vote counts and breakdown.

        • ^^As Debbie said^^

          Nebraska splits their territory into three sections to more accurately reflect the split of their voter base, instead of the winner-take-all most states follow. The rural areas are staunchly red, while the metros such as Omaha, Lincoln, etc. lean more blue. If CA, for example, were to follow this and split along major voter areas (about 30% red, 70% blue across the state), our 55 Electoral Votes would be split to 16 red and 39 blue. Those 16 red votes represent the same voting bloc as Georgia’s 16.

          The winner-take-all model is perfectly legal under the Constitution, as each State is allowed to form its own election process, as long as it’s transparent and honest. But over the decades as nearly the entire nation has adopted it, we’ve arrived at a point where the cities mostly dominate and drive the national elections. It’s contrary to the spirit of the Electoral College’s purpose, as the rural areas are nullified by the few cities (see VA, for example).

      • Our elections are decided by a PROCESS that has been established by state Legislatures, NOT by media PRESS RELEASES.
        Glad to clear that up for you.
        Please, proved citation to which states have CERTIFIED their election results……………… I’ll wait…………..

      • Is this your first time realizing Fox News is not your friend but just another cable “news entertainment” channel?

        Look at what the Press Secretary said AFTER Cavuto cut her off. Its pretty shocking that she says exactly what he cuts her off for not saying.

        I started to look at Fox with a suspicious eye when both the host and a guest both told Newt to shut up about Soros on live TV

        • “I started to look at Fox with a suspicious eye when both the host and a guest both told Newt to shut up about Soros on live TV”

          Fox is scared they will be put on one of those “Lists” the Leftists are making for targeted retribution…

      • Last time I checked the Electoral College makes the call. NOT the Socialist Media hacks. If the Electoral College can’t then Congress will, or the SCOTUS can force a new election. As for Fox? They SOLD OUT and have creds as good as…. CNN.

  2. Unconstitutional legislation that defends the Constitution.
    MDA slamming face first into full retard status.

  3. Such a plan to protect your rights angers the useful idiot moms who voted for Jim Crown Gun Control joe and the ho.

  4. Largely feel-good and values propaganda with no impact upon gun rights.

    Oklahoma is a pretty good place for gun rights. If the State Senator wants to make an impact, he should seek a law to require the State to bring suit in Federal court on behalf of Oklahoma citizens denied their Second Amendment rights by Federal gun control law. Put the backing of the State behind cases to overturn Federal gun laws, pushing them to the Supreme Court.

  5. 2A sanctuary states/counties hold no power of law or legal standing. Might make you feel aff warm and comfortable, but are useless in practical terms. Better to do something useful than to just do something.

    • Hmm, *illegal immigration* sanctuary cities / counties seem to do well [ie, the local LEO will not assist/cooperate with fed LEO, and local DA will not prosecute].

      What’s good for the gander is good for the goose. And 2A is in the Constitution, “illegal immigration” is not….

    • THAT is at the heart of the problem. We have too many people assuming authority they do NOT have. People doing things without regard for the law or the US Constitution. At all levels from the AP to Virginia governors. This is a recipe for complete anarchy.

    • This is effectively a preemption law that goes beyond legislation. It’s not attempting to impose nullification (i.e. declaring federal law void) but is rather preventing counties and municipalities from taking actions on certain federal laws- well within Constitutional bounds for a state, as seen recently in an immigration case with California where the courts sided with the state.

      It’s not a moot point, as we have seen gun control organizations focus hard on more local elections recently and a bunch of blue cities in otherwise red or purple states decide to make their own little fiefdoms of power just like NYC did long ago. Nipping that in the bud is not useless.

      • “It’s not a moot point, as we have seen gun control organizations focus hard on more local elections recently and a bunch of blue cities in otherwise red or purple states decide to make their own little fiefdoms of power just like NYC did long ago.”

        It’s high time NYC’s ‘Sullivan Law’ was targeted with another lawsuit to flood the SCOTUS pipeline…

  6. As an addendum Sen. Dahl is the gentleman was has nearly single handily restored the rights of private citizens to own and carry firearms in the state.while Oklahoma has always been respectful of the citizens’ right to own firearms law have been passed to restrict their ability to carry those fireamrms.

    Thanks to Dahl and Don Spencer of OK2A Open Carry and Constitutional Carry have both passed and been signed into law. He has introduced this Sanctuary legislation and a Campus Carry Bill every year. It is only a matter of time before both of those pass and are signed into law as well. Thankfully, Oklahoma has people like Dahl and Spencer to chip away at the few infringements we had in this state.

    • Oklahoma City is about the only city I would live in voluntarily. Can’t stand metro areas. I’m pure live in the woods, no people, moat with squirrels guarding with Vulcans.

      Did a 14 day road trip across the US a few years ago, just wandering toward Canadian boarder/ND. Visited the bombing memorial with the empty chairs. Spent the day walking around. Kinda flat, but that just makes better rifle ranges!

  7. The issue here seems to be called “unfunded mandates”. I think it might be better described as “funded mandates”.

    Our Constitution was founded on a principle of many individual states that governed their own affairs independently with one federated government that governed international and interstate issues. Not easy to draw clear sharp lines between the two. Nevertheless, that was the idea.

    Our natural instincts are to undermine this principle whenever WE are the side to take advantage of the situation. E.g., we PotG want National Reciprocity whereas gun controllers want states to retain unfettered powers to May-Issue.

    Bearing in mind that we can’t have our cake and eat it too, we need to be judicious about when we invoke federal plenary power; and, when to argue for “states rights”. For example, we PotG are often tempted to call for Assistant US Attorneys to enforce Felon-in-Possession in Chicago because local DAs won’t do so. Yes, if we locked-up most Chicago felons found to be in-possession we could reduce the statistics of gun-homicide and that would strengthen our cause. But at what price?

    We would consequently strengthen the argument that gun regulation is more-so a federal issue, not merely a state police power issue. Once the Federal fox is inside the coop we can’t get it out when it has its way with the chickens.

    • National Reciprocity is, IMHO, already in the US Constitution, *assuming* for a minute that States have the Power to mandate a “Concealed Weapon Permit” or “Concealed Handgun Permit” [aka Constitutional Carry]:

      The Full-Faith-and-Credit Clause states:
      The Constitutional obligation of each state to recognize and accept the judicial proceedings, public records, and legislative acts of every other state.

      Obtaining a CWP / CHP / … is a PUBLIC RECORD in your state, and is NO DIFFERENT in that regards than a marriage license, or drivers license, or vehicle registration.

      Point being, do we *need* another Law, when it should be covered by the existing Legal Document?

      • The Full-Faith-and-Credit Clause does not apply to licenses. If it did, my license to practice law would have allowed my to practice in any state, which I assure you it did not.

        Reciprocity of drivers licenses is due to agreements between the states and is NOT the result of any federal legislation or application of Constitutional Law.

        • Ralph, you have identified what the Full Faith and Credit has *become*, not necessarily what was intended. Much like the Commerce Clause now includes that which *impacts* commerce, including the production of goods for *self-use* versus, you know, selling or buying it. Me thinks that is not what the Framers intended.

          So that really begs the question – why isn’t Bar and Law Practice subject to Full Faith and Credit, if it’s a publicly recorded action?

        • My late Mommy told me 40-50 years ago that was due to the Soldiers and Sailors Relief Act, initiated due to the military (moving around all the time) being required to change drivers licenses, auto licenses and registration etc at some cost every time, and even arrested or having cars confiscated by crooked cops or counties, sometimes requiring all these actions several times a year.

        • “Ralph, you have identified what the Full Faith and Credit has *become*, not necessarily what was intended.”

          No, it’s intent was never to make licenses etc. binding on the states that didn’t issue them. No state would ever give up that much control of its own sovereignty — not now and not in 1787.

        • I believe you err. In Lincoln’s day he WAS an attorney in Illinois, and was still considered to be so in Washington D.C. In modern history “Licenses” have become an excuse for Government to STEAL MORE MONEY from it’s citizens while providing very little in return. There is NO justification for charging $100 to renew a driver’s “License”. Zero training required, at best a written refresher test and an updated photo?

  8. Whatever legal effect this type of legislation would have, the fact remains that it is a forceful demonstration of the difficulties the feds would have in enforcing Biden’s gun control wish list. The feds don’t have enough law enforcement bodies to do this themselves. They need help from state and local agencies. The more state and local governments that tell the feds that they will not cooperate in such a venture the more likely Biden and his supporters will realize that increased gun control is something they really want to waste their political capital on.

  9. My family moved from Oklahoma, sold their house, to Montana, where I live.

    I was like “why?”

  10. OK is a bit far for me to move. It would be swell for a dozen or more states to follow their lead. Let’s get our Resistance started so the balkanization can begin already.
    Look.at the elections map and it’s clear there is a split going on.

  11. “Cacky Poarch” ???? Is that a new, uncurbable STD? A genetic deformity? An emerging lethal virus? Do we all need Haz-Mat suits when we use Public Bathrooms because it might be lurking on the toilet seat?

  12. “State Senator Moves to Make Oklahoma a Second Amendment Sanctuary”. Good move but only because the current elected officials do not follow nor believe in the Constitution, unless it supports what they want to do and do not have the moral and physical leadership ability to tell Washington to go fly a kite.

  13. ““He is known for being an extremist. As a senator, he has proposed unconstitutional legislation and that’s what this feels like right now…”

    No arguments or evidence, only “feels”

  14. ““He is known for being an extremist. As a senator, he has proposed unconstitutional legislation and that’s what this feels like right now…”


  15. My wife is originally from Ok but spent most of her adult life in CA. Ten years ago we moved to NM when it was still a politically decent place to live. But now the liberal leftist democrats have taken complete control of the state and are taking their marching orders from the DNC and are bought and paid for by Bloomberg and Soros organizations. Keep this going senator and OK my be my next move. I have always liked the Tulsa area on my twice a year visits.

Comments are closed.