Cache County Council passes resolution in support of Second Amendment

LOGAN – After very little discussion and no debate, the Cache County Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to pass a resolution in support of the Second Amendment.

Cache County is among several counties in Utah to publicly support the right to keep and bear arms.

Uintah County passed an ordinance in January, becoming the first Second Amendment sanctuary county in the Beehive state. Among other things, the ordinance deems any effort to curtail gun ownership in that county unlawful.

Cache County commissioners steered away from the term “sanctuary” and the idea of an ordinance, opting instead to pass a resolution that would “memorialize and emphasize the importance of the Second Amendment.”

The resolution states that the council “wishes to respond to the request of its citizenry…and put forth an official position on the Second Amendment.”

It continues, “We do hereby support upholding the Constitution of the State of Utah and Constitution of the United States and shall defend with all legal means necessary, all the inalienable rights held therein, including the Second Amendment and the right it guarantees the citizens of Cache County, Utah to keep and bear arms without infringement.”

The resolution is strictly symbolic and sends a message to state and federal lawmakers that “we support the Constitution,” according to Cache County Attorney James Swink, who drafted the resolution.

Box Elder, Wayne and Utah counties recently passed similar resolutions and ordinances.

A handful of gun-related bills were introduced in Utah’s 2020 legislative session. All three bills — one to create liability for people who give or sell their firearms to someone who later uses it to harm someone, one to enact universal background checks, and one to criminalize irresponsible storage of guns — were either rejected or tabled.

Free News Delivery by Email

Would you like to have the day's news stories delivered right to your inbox every evening? Enter your email below to start!


  • KA March 11, 2020 at 1:12 pm Reply

    I’ll never understand why everything in America is regulated to the nth degree, but guns – for the most part – get a pass.

    • John March 11, 2020 at 9:48 pm Reply

      I hope you’re joking. the 2A is the MOST regulated of ANY in the Bill of Rights. But the 1A could use an overhaul so media companies can’t blatanly lie and spread dangerous stories that are false without repercussions…fake news isn’t free speech!

      • Ry March 12, 2020 at 4:29 pm Reply

        You might want to take that whole fake worry up with your local Fox News affiliate, bud. Unless you consider bringing on instigators who arent professional in any field, much less the ones they’re talking about at any given moment, to be trustworthy reporting tactics.

  • Andy March 11, 2020 at 6:03 pm Reply

    I wonder how much they support the “well regulated” part of The Constitution. Like universal background checks, not selling guns to emotionally unstable people, and violent crime offenders and other rational laws that smarter and happier countries with fewer gun crimes use (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Canada).

    • Sky February 3, 2021 at 9:58 am Reply

      Fun fact, the meaning of words back then we’re different. Milita meant regulars, citizens, the entirety of the people. Well regulated back in the day meant well trained as in you knew how to use those said weapons that are protected from government infringement.

  • Gregory Auer March 11, 2020 at 10:45 pm Reply

    Why don’t you go there… We do not need any more gun laws. The ones we have are just fine.

  • Gregory March 11, 2020 at 10:48 pm Reply

    We do people constantly say we need more gun laws. All state’s should be like Utah. There would be less problems.

  • Storm March 12, 2020 at 3:25 am Reply

    I am honestly baffled how people beleive making guns harder to get for law abiding citizens will help anyone with criminals able to get them through other means. Yea, being gun free zones is sure working out for LA, Chigago, New York, etc. Where crime is totally not rampant and where tons of gun crime is present, right?

    • KA March 12, 2020 at 7:32 am Reply

      So what’s your solution, no gun laws at all? Why have laws regulating drugs, alcohol, assault, murder, theft, etc.? People are still going to commit those crimes, right?

  • Allen fenimore March 12, 2020 at 4:36 pm Reply

    Why its it when your neighborhood burns its self to the ground why is it your falt meeaning do not give up your rights for anything. Anything for any reason your gun is yours not thirs

  • Ryan Michael Gaines March 12, 2020 at 4:56 pm Reply

    Wow, so, so brave of these 6 men to *declare their allegiance* to the 2nd constitutional amendment! I dont think I’ve yet seen such a show of courage in the last 100 years. What a backbone from this good old boys club.

    But seriously though, we need better gun control laws, not only to curb shootings of other people, but also the availability of guns to committ suicide. I mean, if you really claim to be pro-life, you’d be all for that, wouldn’t you? Or is all that hubbub really just a kink for seeing pregnancies carried to term without any regard for what happens after?

    As a CCW holder and active firearms consumer, I would welcome the idea of having to register my firearms and go in for a check at the police station once a year. Red flag laws are also needed and effective, y’know, since it takes a community to be safe. Required gun storage laws are also a great idea and something I think is worth the privilege of owning a gun.

    People, not all regulation is an infringement. Unless you really want to go back to living in the wild wild west, and have *more* death, necessary precautions need to be taken. Those that would still argue the precautions to be infringement probably also don’t like mandatory seatbelt laws, but the evidence for saving lives doesnt lie, so you really have no argument.

  • joe Jarrett March 12, 2020 at 6:15 pm Reply

    I strongly urge you to research and read all that you can on
    a whole plethora of communications between the founders, esp the anti-federalists. The (now) 2nd is worded as it is just to placate the Federalists and smooth the passage. Bottom line:
    No gov. interference with ownership,, was the driving thought. AND yes they had
    miscreants in those days also.

    • Ryan March 13, 2020 at 12:57 pm Reply

      Ya, ok dude. Guess what, the constitution is ruled on according to what the wording is, not according to what a certain faction of the writers wanted, and it matters not that you just so happen to agree with their +200 year old views on gun ownership. All that matters is the agreement they came to with the federalists in order to produce the amendment.
      Be my guest to have no government regulation with your flint-lock single shot black powder 40lb rifle and an impractical 500 lb canon, since your argument bases itself in the late 18th century. Since we’re in the 21st century, however, I welcome and actively vote for sensible gun control regulations as previously mentioned. I don’t want irresponsible gun owners giving me a bad rep, and I dont want innocent people to die.

      If we can amend slavery, allow women their right to vote, conclude that not *all* speech is protected, the precedent has been set, and we can certainly do so with the 2nd.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.