{"id":78518,"date":"2022-03-10T09:05:06","date_gmt":"2022-03-10T15:05:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=78518"},"modified":"2022-03-10T09:10:06","modified_gmt":"2022-03-10T15:10:06","slug":"78518","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=78518","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201cSecond Amendment Protection Act\u201d Clears [Wyoming]<\/strong> House By 43 \u2013 15 Margin<\/a><\/p>\n

A bill aimed at prohibiting Wyoming law enforcement officers from enforcing unconstitutional restrictions on Second Amendment rights won final approval from the House on Wednesday.<\/p>\n

Representatives voted 43-15 to approve Senate File 102, the \u201cSecond Amendment Protection Act\u201d in its final House review<\/p>\n

Defenders of the bill debated opponents who maintained the bill should be killed because it was weaker than one considered and rejected earlier in the session.<\/p>\n

\u201cI, for one, would like my constituents to have something rather than nothing,\u201d said Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette. \u201cWhen we say it\u2019s a weak bill, but we\u2019re willing to go with no protection at all, which is weaker?\u201d<\/p>\n

SF102 would prohibit any Wyoming law enforcement agent from enforcing unconstitutional federal restrictions on the Second Amendment. If an unconstitutional federal rule was enforced, the enforcing officer could face one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000.<\/p>\n

The bill had been roundly criticized by backers of another gun rights bill, SF87, the \u201cSecond Amendment Preservation Act.\u201d The bill, which failed to win introduction early in the session, would have allowed citizens to sue officials they felt were responsible for enforcing unconstitutional barriers to the Second Amendment, including increases in taxes and fees on ammunition.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Rep. Dan Laursen, R-Powell, tried to amend SF102 to essentially replace it with SF87, but the attempt was ruled out of order by House Speaker Eric Barlow, R-Gillette, because of procedural rules he said would prohibit the consideration of the same bill twice in one session.<\/p>\n

But opponents of SF102 said it provided no actual protection for Second Amendment rights.<\/p>\n

\u201cSF102 is weak at best,\u201d said. Rep. Bill Fortner, R-Gillette. \u201cDo we want a bill that\u2019s got teeth in it to \u2026 put us first or do we want a weak bill that does nothing to protect us?<\/p>\n

SF102 had the support of Wyoming\u2019s law enforcement officers, who opposed SF87 and one like it introduced and rejected in 2021 because it allowed them to be sued if they enforced a law someone considered unconstitutional.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe reason being they thought police officers and sheriffs, all the law enforcement should have an upper hand to control we the people,\u201d Fortner said.<\/p>\n

Opponents also argued the bill would require action by one branch of government against another.<\/p>\n

\u201cSF102 says one branch of government is going to hold the other branch accountable,\u201d said Rep. Robert Wharff, R-Evanston. \u201cAnd that fails every time.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, the bill\u2019s backers objected to the description of Wyoming\u2019s law enforcement officers as wishing to maintain the \u201cupper hand\u201d over individuals.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey do care about our rights,\u201d Bear said. \u201cThey protect them every single day. It\u2019s a mischaracterization to say they think they are above us. We need to be careful we don\u2019t become like the crowd that wants to defund the police.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Senate will now be asked to approve any House changes to the bill. If the two chambers agree to the changes, the bill will be sent to Gov. Mark Gordon for his signature.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u201cSecond Amendment Protection Act\u201d Clears [Wyoming] House By 43 \u2013 15 Margin A bill aimed at prohibiting Wyoming law enforcement officers from enforcing unconstitutional restrictions on Second Amendment rights won final approval from the House on Wednesday. Representatives voted 43-15 to approve Senate File 102, the \u201cSecond Amendment Protection Act\u201d in its final House review … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78518","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-politics","category-rkba"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78518","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=78518"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78518\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":78525,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78518\/revisions\/78525"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=78518"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=78518"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=78518"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}