|
Forum Rules | Firearms Safety | Firearms Photos | Links | Library | Lost Password | Email Changes |
Register | FAQ | Calendar | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
January 26, 2013, 05:00 PM | #1 |
Member
Join Date: February 26, 2009
Location: TX
Posts: 40
|
County Sheriffs Can Block Federal Gun Control
Most people, including politicians fail to realize that the ultimate legal authorities in the land are the county sheriffs. This was established from the time of the Founding Fathers and upheld by the US Supreme Court in the 1997 case of Printz v. United States.
The case involved new federal regulations involved with the Brady Bill and gun control. FBI agents went around to the various county sheriffs and demanded that they follow the new federal guidelines. Then Graham County (AZ) Sheriff Richard Mack and several others saw the Brady Bill as being unconstitutional and refused to impose the new federal guidelines. Part of their defense was that the county sheriff was the supreme law enforcement officer over their county and that the federal government could not supersede their legal authority. Referring once again to President Madison, Scalia wrote: “In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself.” (P. 922). In other words, the county sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county and he does not have to bow to the tyranny of the federal government if he deems such actions to be unconstitutional or unlawful. In essence, the county sheriff has more legal authority within his county than the governor or the state or even the president of the United States. Today, former Sheriff Richard Mack works with a number of county sheriffs throughout the county, helping them understand the extent of their authority and how they can legally defy the federal government. I would highly recommend that you contact your county sheriff and see if he/she is aware of their powers and duties. If not, get them in contact with Mack and urge your county sheriff to stand up against upcoming unconstitutional gun laws that the liberals are going to try to impose on us. |
January 26, 2013, 05:30 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 26, 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 779
|
If only Charlie Beck didn't run my county.
__________________
I told the new me, "Meet me at the bus station and hold a sign that reads: 'Today is the first day of the rest of your life.'" But the old me met me with a sign that read: "Welcome back." Who you are is not a function of where you are. -Off Minor |
January 26, 2013, 05:40 PM | #3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 19, 2011
Location: Virginia
Posts: 370
|
Just read an article saying the AG in Delaware issued an order removing all arrest powers from the Sheriffs in 3 counties. The AG is Bidens son!! Will be interesting to see if it's true!!
|
January 26, 2013, 05:41 PM | #4 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
MC 1911, you don't have a link to that article, do ya?
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
January 26, 2013, 05:43 PM | #5 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
|
Didn't Beck recently change the impound policy for unlicensed drivers making it easier for them to get their cars back or something? He should be familiar with selective enforcement...
Unfortunately for most of the population the sheriff's dept. is not the only or primary LEA in town. The refusal by sheriffs to enforce federal law is mostly symbolic. |
January 26, 2013, 06:01 PM | #6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 24, 2011
Posts: 990
|
Spats- 30 seconds of google-fu
|
January 26, 2013, 06:17 PM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: May 25, 2011
Posts: 1,755
|
DE Sheriffs
It seems its a little more complicated than the americanfreepress article would have people believe. It's questionable if the sheriffs in Delaware are law enforcement in the traditional sense. |
January 26, 2013, 06:24 PM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Location: Georgia
Posts: 1,599
|
It depends on the verbage in the law as to whether a Sheriff can legally deny enforcing the law. With correct wording, it is actually a violation of the law for them to ignore or fail to enforce it.
Last edited by shootniron; January 30, 2013 at 12:05 AM. |
January 27, 2013, 07:49 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 15, 2010
Posts: 627
|
I believe
they can ignore it but can't block it
__________________
NRA Distinguished Life Member "Abraham Lincoln freed all men, but Sam Colt made them all equal." (post Civil War slogan) |
January 27, 2013, 08:20 AM | #10 |
Staff
Join Date: July 28, 2010
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 8,819
|
Thanks for the link, guys. Yeah, I guess I shoulda worked on my google-fu.
__________________
I'm a lawyer, but I'm not your lawyer. If you need some honest-to-goodness legal advice, go buy some. |
January 27, 2013, 08:25 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 19, 2011
Location: Virginia
Posts: 370
|
Sorry,I should have added the link!
|
January 30, 2013, 12:03 AM | #12 |
Junior member
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 9,995
|
Just like the immigration laws, they don't have to enforce, but that wont stop FBI or ATFE.
Unless they have state legislators backing them with criminal statutes for any federal officer enforcing the law, they won't be able to do much. |
January 30, 2013, 01:44 AM | #13 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
The sheriff can't block federal gun control. The case you cite in no way supports this very broad proposition as you claim it does.
The holding of the case is congress has no authority to force the executive branch of state governments to enforce federal law. So they can't compel the sheriff to assist them but the feds can and will enforce federal law. Quote:
As a community we really need to avoid crack pot theories with no basis in law. |
|
January 30, 2013, 01:43 PM | #14 |
Senior Member
Join Date: February 18, 2008
Posts: 323
|
In most communities, the law is already stretched beyond it's means.
What if they had to arrest several million of us at the same time?
__________________
Above is based on the opinion of a 20 year Small Arms Marksmanship and Training Unit USAF instructor with more than 30 years in competitive shooting sports. Your mileage may vary. |
January 30, 2013, 02:25 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 6, 2012
Location: Lakewood, CO
Posts: 1,057
|
My take on this and other court decisions is that, County Sheriffs have no power or obligation to enforce a federal statute. Federal laws are to be enforced by federal agents/prosecutors.
There are many federal laws which have state/local mirrors, these are the laws that county sheriffs are charged with enforcing.
__________________
NRA Lifetime Member Since 1999 "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few public officials." George Mason |
January 30, 2013, 04:51 PM | #16 |
Senior Member
Join Date: November 16, 2008
Posts: 1,184
|
Nasty,
You are describing the effectiveness of civil disobedience. The inability to lock every violator up is what makes civil disobedience work. |
January 31, 2013, 07:51 AM | #17 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: April 4, 2012
Location: South Jersey
Posts: 2,217
|
Quote:
__________________
Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it. Milton Freidman "If you find yourself in a fair fight,,, Your tactics suck"- Unknown |
|
January 31, 2013, 08:28 AM | #18 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,715
|
Quote:
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
|
February 5, 2013, 10:37 PM | #19 |
Senior Member
Join Date: July 5, 2008
Posts: 182
|
I'm amazed how many people misinterpret Printz. Nothing in Printz says what people say it says and then they offer quotes as evidence that clearly don't say what people are claiming the quote says.
In Printz, the Supreme Court said that the federal government cannot force states to do work without paying for that work. It also states that the Constitution reserves unenumerated powers to the states or the people (which is what the Constitution says). Nowhere does the Court suggest that unemerated powers are reserved to the county sheriff. I wish it were so, folks. I really do. But it ain't. |
February 6, 2013, 11:52 AM | #20 | |
Staff
Join Date: November 23, 2005
Location: California - San Francisco
Posts: 9,471
|
Remember that the Founding Fathers provided in the Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2, emphasis added):
Printz v. U.S., 521 U.S. 898 (Supreme Court, 1997) ruled essentially only that a federal law could not direct state law enforcement officers to participate in the administration of a federal regulatory program. But the federal government may still administer its regulatory programs in a State. And if something is illegal under federal law, it is still illegal even if it is not illegal under state law. So you will get arrested by the FBI, ATF, U. S. Marshall or DEA, instead of the local police or sheriff; you will be tried in federal court instead of state court; and you will go to a federal prison instead of a state prison.
__________________
"It is long been a principle of ours that one is no more armed because he has possession of a firearm than he is a musician because he owns a piano. There is no point in having a gun if you are not capable of using it skillfully." -- Jeff Cooper |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|