With Gov. Ralph “Coonman” Northam holding onto his job somehow and Democrats controlling both houses of the General Assembly in Virginia, there’s been a movement to establish Second Amendment sanctuaries, inspired by sanctuary cities, in which local government and law enforcement would refuse to cooperate with the state when it comes to gun control laws including confiscation.

The Washington Post editorial board published a piece Saturday calling the gun sanctuary movement a fad and mainly symbolic. Overlooking the Second Amendment completely, the editorial board also argued that there’s no parallel at all to be made to sanctuary cities, in which no laws were being broken — except, of course, for being in the country illegally, which is still against the law.

Remind us one more time: Aren’t the immigration laws passed by Congress “duly enacted laws?” And if a city or county refuses to cooperate with the federal government, it too is defying duly enacted laws.

The WaPo editorial board sees it differently:

Vigilantism, with its alluring tingle of defiance and frontier justice, conjures a cinematic idea of American individualism. A similar impulse is at work among advocates of the so-called Second Amendment sanctuary movement, a trend in mainly rural counties declaring they will refuse to enforce restrictive state gun laws. Both are examples of individuals who, lacking legal authority, put themselves above the law, thereby promoting chaos.

The idea — and the term itself — has gained traction in Western states and elsewhere, inspired by “sanctuary cities” that have adopted policies barring cooperation with federal immigration officials to deport unauthorized migrants.

The distinction between the two sanctuaries is basic. Localities that have passed resolutions declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuary jurisdictions are threatening to ignore laws enacted by duly elected state legislatures and signed by governors. Immigration-focused sanctuary localities are breaking no law; rather, they are refusing purely voluntary cooperation in service to federal law enforcement.

It’s no surprise that the editorial board has no problem whatsoever with sanctuary cities and illegal immigrants flouting America’s laws.

That’s a great question we all know the answer to.