They are a good thing in the sense they make a STRONG political statement if most counties pass a resolution that sends a message to frankfort.My biggest concern is that some of the people involved in this movement believe that these resolutions will protect them. The expectations are enormous. When they find out that the resolutions are meaningless, what will be their reaction? Will they think that the law has let them down and that this betrayal justifies violence. I am genuinely happy to see Ky. gun owners motivated to some action but this not going to solve anything. There is an argument to be made that big things can be built from small beginnings but this is less than small. The amount of hype involved in this is well beyond reasonable. There is also the danger that people feel like they have finished the job after passing these resolutions when, in fact, nothing has been done. The good side of this is that if you think these resolutions are a good thing, you should have no problem getting them passed. They are meaningless so why wouldn't your Fiscal Court pass one.
We would be much better off taking this momentum and using it to pass an enhanced preemption law, but surprisingly the people involved in this sanctuary movement are of the opinion that preemption is an antigun tactic that prevents their county from protecting them from state gun control laws.
But . Ordinances would be better.
I'm good with the level of preemption that the state has now and would oppose giv UK by it any additional power.
The state is overstepping its constitutional bounds as well already as the only power granted it is to prevent cc.
A point I made to Senator Hornback when he responded to me. Along with a few others.