On November 3, voters in Oregon’s Coos County voted to separate themselves from de jure compliance with state and federal gun control laws by giving their sheriff the job of deciding which laws are constitutional–and therefore deserving of compliance–and which are not.This vote occurred at the same time that pro-Second Amendment incumbents were retaining control of the Virginia Senate and pro-Second Amendment candidate Matt Bevin (R) was winning the Kentucky gubernatorial race. Moreover, this rejection of state and federal gun controls took place in Oregon–the most recent ground zero for Obama’s gun control push, following the heinous attack in a gun free zone at Umpqua Community College.
According to the Huffington Post, Coos County voters passed the “2nd Amendment Preservation Ordinance with 61 percent of the vote.” The ordinance empowers Coos County Sheriff Greg Zanni to determine if a given state or federal gun law goes against the constitution. “If he thinks they do, the county is then banned from using any resources to enforce those laws. Any county employee who violates the ordinance will be fined $2,000.”
The constitution is quite open to interpretation. Less so than modern laws, but it is still there. Just look at the disarmament industry and some "fudds" who see the National Guard as the militia, while ignoring the Unorganized Militia. Yelling "fire" in a theater and a few other things highlight those grey areas too. To have one person, and ONLY one person determine the constitutionality of a law, based on HIS interpretation, is actually quite flawed.
However, infringements should be nullified. I hope this catches on in other areas of the country.