Sheriffs Nationwide begin rejecting Federal Gun control laws

Bigun · Veteran Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 1954

Too many stories to post, here is a google search

For the uninformed to the US state law enforcement structure, there is a very keen difference between a Sheriff's office and a police jurisdiction. Police are typically appointed by a city council to handle policing of a certain area in the county. A sheriffs office is typically required by the state's constitution and varies state by state and is typically held as the highest form of law enforcement in the county.

That said, I'm glad to see local law enforcement finally getting fed up with this gun control nonsense and putting an abrupt stop to it, post-haste.
_________________
BK - "Then, after months of loud-mouthed shit-talking and own-fart smelling, you lost the big bet, fair snd square, and are being a baby about it."

pjp

McGruff · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 28 Dec 2004 Posts: 145

"Oathbreakers"?! Holy crap. We're going to need an industrial-sized freezer to store all the cold, dead, trophy hands.

pjp · Posted: Mon Jan 21, 2013 2:42 am Post subject:

I look forward to the Legacy Of Leftism in which they become so passive they stop working, reproducing, and eventually die from dehydration.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008

Bigun · Veteran Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 1954

I wonder how much good one liners from Comedy Central will do if and when said person gets mugged or worse.
_________________
BK - "Then, after months of loud-mouthed shit-talking and own-fart smelling, you lost the big bet, fair snd square, and are being a baby about it."

energyman76b · Advocate Joined: 26 Mar 2003 Posts: 2024 Location: Germany

so sheriffs are allowed to break laws?

how idiotic do you have to be to support something like that?

sheriffs must be those who follow the laws the closest. Everybody else might be free to deviate a bit. But those who are taxed with the burden of enforcement have no right to ignore it. In fact, all those sheriffs should be trialed for high treason.
_________________

pjp · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:29 am Post subject:

eponymous_dick · Veteran Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 1550 Location: U.S.A.

Obama has paid his little lip service to gun control and isn't going to do jack shit.

The Democrats that aren't stupid (including Bill Clinton, while addressing some gathering of high-level Democrat muckity-mucks today or yesterday) have already started telling the others to get off the gun control issue unless they want to get their asses handed to them in the mid-terms again.

He said something like, "Don't make the mistake of looking down your noses at these people or misunderstanding how passionate many people are about this issue. The people pushing this issue come from a very different world than the one these folks live in. I know, because I come from that world too."

So they'll move on to some other issue they won't get shit done about. Today Obama mentioned a couple: climate change (like he's actually going to do something), gay rights, blah blah blah.... same old tired shit he threw under the bus the past four years. I'll tell you what Obama's mission in life is going to be for the next four years, and it's not going to have anything to do with gun control; it's going to be raising taxes, to permanently lock in the spending that's currently piling up as a trillion in new debt each year.

In other words, the crack-whore with the stolen credit card is not only not giving it back, now she wants you to start making regular payments for the charges she's racking up. If guns have any role in that grand scheme of things, its to serve to make you pay.
_________________
"I before E, except after C, or when sounded like A, as in 'neighbor' and 'weigh'... unless you have sufficient cause to seize a scientist's heist of weird foreign species."

Old School · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 2:39 am Post subject:

eponymous_dick · Veteran Joined: 14 Mar 2006 Posts: 1550 Location: U.S.A.

flysideways · Apprentice Joined: 29 Jan 2005 Posts: 151

Here you go:

According to Section 9-27.220 of the US Attorneys' Manual:

The attorney for the government should commence or recommend Federal prosecution if he/she believes that the person's conduct constitutes a Federal offense and that the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction, unless, in his/her judgment, prosecution should be declined because:

No substantial Federal interest would be served by prosecution;
The person is subject to effective prosecution in another jurisdiction; or
There exists an adequate non-criminal alternative to prosecution.

pjp · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 4:54 am Post subject:

Plus, the villain always falls when his minions finally wake up and stop enabling.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.

In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008

Bigun · Veteran Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 1954

Completely off-topic, but now my google search link now includes this very thread as result #3.
_________________
BK - "Then, after months of loud-mouthed shit-talking and own-fart smelling, you lost the big bet, fair snd square, and are being a baby about it."

energyman76b · Advocate Joined: 26 Mar 2003 Posts: 2024 Location: Germany

Politicians make the law
Courts control the law
Police&sheriffs enforce the law.

Two groups are allowed to make changes and adjustments.

One group isn't.

But hey, I am still waiting for the example of armed citizens protecting their rights. In the USA.

I only know the opposite: armed citizens watching&helping to oppress others and to break your precious 'constitution'.
_________________

Bigun · Veteran Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 1954

McGruff · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 28 Dec 2004 Posts: 145

Those are crimes not attempts to impose tyranny.

Old School · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 6:51 pm Post subject:

McGruff · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 28 Dec 2004 Posts: 145

Ruby Ridge is a tragedy created by guns. Without them, the conflict would have been resolved by peaceful means through the legal process. His wife and his son died needlessly because of a wilful refusal to accept lawful authority. You do not have the right to use lethal force to resist arrest.

This is not an example of tyranny. There was no deliberate government policy to persecute or oppress anyone. If anything, it's an example of insurrectionism.

energyman76b · Advocate Joined: 26 Mar 2003 Posts: 2024 Location: Germany

energyman76b · Advocate Joined: 26 Mar 2003 Posts: 2024 Location: Germany

Old School · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:13 pm Post subject:

Old School · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 9:14 pm Post subject:

McGruff · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 28 Dec 2004 Posts: 145

False evidence or other mistakes are not evidence of government tyranny. These seem to be individual rather than systemic errors.

Refusing to submit to a lawful arrest is definitely evidence of insurrectionism.

He should have got a good lawyer, gone to court, and defended himself via peaceful, legal means. Even if he'd been incorrectly found guilty of a crime he didn't commit, there is no possible outcome that could have been worse than losing his wife and son.

Guns didn't give him the power to defend his liberty (there was only ever going to be one outcome to a standoff with the FBI). They did give him the power to create a terrible tragedy.

Bigun · Veteran Joined: 21 Sep 2003 Posts: 1954

Muso · Posted: Tue Jan 22, 2013 11:21 pm Post subject:

Chuck Woolery on Assault Weapons
_________________
“If the words 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" don't include the right to experiment with your own consciousness, then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp it was written on.” ~ T. McKenna