How many Divisions does he have?
Given who’s currently heading the military? All of them, I’d say.
This law feels emotionally satisfying to me, but I think it’s impractical. The Federal government isn’t going to allow counties or states to arrest their people. The first step will be cutting off all Federal funding to anyone who enacts the policy. That will economically devastate whoever tries it. After that, I think they’ll show up in such massive displays of force that no arrests would be possible without bloodshed, and nobody’s going to do that.
I do think that having state and local laws nullifying unconstitutional Federal gun laws are good, and I think state and local laws barring any state or local law enforcement from assisting the Feds in enforcing such laws are also great to have. You can’t stop the Feds from doing what they want to do, but you can stop helping them. That actually makes a big difference as the Feds don’t have the resources to do all the ground work themselves. They count on local cooperation. Take that away and their operational capacity is greatly diminished.
All of them whenever a leftist priority is at stake, as per the "woke" DoD ...
“How many Divisions does he have?”
I’m thinking the same. While this certainly sounds good, and I wish them the best, people are SERIOUSLY UNDERESTIMATING the power of the federal government. The question will be very simple: How much pain is this county and Missouri ready to take accept to protect the Second Amendment. I can think some tools off the top of my head that will get the attention of state/county leaders, if they fail to comply - such as seizing their bank accounts and their property, for starters. The feds can do all that from DC, if they wish.