Tennessee seeks to make federal law enforcement subordinate to the local sheriff

page: 2
81
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by addygrace
 


Cali really needs this to happen. Like... right now, the less the feds get away with the people can smoke and chill and think.




posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 02:34 PM
link   
What a great idea... the way it was meant to be. The federal government is a product of the individual states, not the other way around.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by stinger94
 


Can't never did do anything. Lets all bow down and take it because we can't do anything anyway. Biggest cop out for cowards and traitors. No one said it is easy but how easy is it going to be for us all if they keep getting away with their corruption. No one has said that the states governments are perfect but the feds have already played their hands of what they want and what they want to do. Freedom is another word for nothing left to lose do we actually want to have nothing before we stand up for our individual freedom.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 02:38 PM
link   
Oh Great!

I thought we'd progressed past the whims of local law enforcement.

I don't think some of you are thinking clearly.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Oh Great!

I thought we'd progressed past the whims of local law enforcement.

I don't think some of you are thinking clearly.



Local law enforcement is accountable to the local government, federal law enforcement is accountable to a bunch of faceless bureaucrats in Washington.

When the feds screw up, they get promotions (or if its REALLY bad, moved to another department with the same or better pay). Look at what happened to the guys in charge of that gun running scheme if you don't believe me. There is absolutely no accountability in federal law enforcement. They are totally out of control and only laws like this will ever bring them back into check.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem

Originally posted by Annee
Oh Great!

I thought we'd progressed past the whims of local law enforcement.

I don't think some of you are thinking clearly.



Local law enforcement is accountable to the local government, federal law enforcement is accountable to a bunch of faceless bureaucrats in Washington.


I live in Arizona.

I know all about local law enforcement - - - and its damn scary.

They need to answer to someone - - - to keep their personal power under control.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
They answer to the people at the local level.

Whose corruption is easier to fight? I'll take the local corruption of Boss Hogg (Dukes of Hazard) over another Bush or Obama any day...



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
edit on 19-9-2011 by neo96 because: edited cause someone complained no such thing as free speech



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by TreadUpon
 


boss hogg and roscoe p coltrain

hilarious how that fits obama and biden


Is it really necessary for you to slam Obama in every thread?

Especially - - when it has nothing to do with Obama?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:54 PM
link   
edit on 19-9-2011 by neo96 because: edited cause someone complained no such thing as free speech



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
Waste of time, it's just a political stunt for people like the preceding ATS users who think it would actually work.

Supremecy Clause. /end of thread



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:00 PM
link   
the way to deal with a bully that's bigger than you is to turn the entire play ground against them - if they pass this law then so might others and at some point the king is going to have to negotiate with there people or face irrelevancy.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Annee
Oh Great!

I thought we'd progressed past the whims of local law enforcement.

I don't think some of you are thinking clearly.


You're right, we have. We have "evolved" to the whims of Federal law enforcement which, for some odd reason, trumps the local level at this point. I swear to God, some people stroke their chains and lick the boots that kick 'em. Sorry, but if you think Sheriff Joe is worse than the Feds, then move out of Maricopa county. I knew many people who lived in Apache Junction (Pinal County) and communted to Phoenix (Maricopa County) to work. I live in one of the northern counties and have nothing but good things to say for the Sheriff department out here. They have a lot of ground to cover and do a great job at it IMO. They do A LOT better than the Feds ever could.

If you think Sheriff Joe is so bad, get caught driving drunk in the Salt River Reservation. The police out there will change your mind for you.





posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by circuitsports
the way to deal with a bully that's bigger than you is to turn the entire play ground against them - if they pass this law then so might others and at some point the king is going to have to negotiate with there people or face irrelevancy.


Thank you.

For awhile there I thought I was the only one who got that.

There is a strength in numbers that many people don't seem to understand. And it's sad.





posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
Waste of time, it's just a political stunt for people like the preceding ATS users who think it would actually work.

Supremecy Clause. /end of thread


Bend over and take it like a man. / end of thread.





posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple

Originally posted by Annee
Oh Great!

I thought we'd progressed past the whims of local law enforcement.

I don't think some of you are thinking clearly.


You're right, we have. We have "evolved" to the whims of Federal law enforcement which, for some odd reason, trumps the local level at this point. I swear to God, some people stroke their chains and lick the boots that kick 'em. Sorry, but if you think Sheriff Joe is worse than the Feds, then move out of Maricopa county.



Sheriff Joe's method works for the people who support his belief.

But - - if Federal law saved your ass from a local enforcement - - - you'd be supporting the Federal law.

People want what they want. Sometimes they don't think beyond that.

And if I could move out of the area of Arizona I am in - - I would. I don't like living in the dark ages.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Annee
 


I support local enforcement over federal enforcement. The feds just have a way of screwing things up without even trying. It's the nature of the beast I think. They have such an all-encompassing area both physically and legally that there is no way for them to know what's happening on the local level to the extent where they can be effective at making and enforcing laws. I just don't see that as being possible.





posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper
Waste of time, it's just a political stunt for people like the preceding ATS users who think it would actually work.

Supremecy Clause. /end of thread


It's not so much the supremecy clause as it is preemption that is destroying our states rights. In the original meaning and writing of the supremecy clause it was understood that any federal law that trumped state law would have to contain language staing that the law would have full constitutional authority over state law and the law would be enforced by local as well as federal authority.

Once preemption was writen in that all changed and it is now commonly a preemptive that all federal laws preempt state law. When a law passed by Congress plainly states that it is intended to preempt state laws, courts have little difficulty applying this express preemption. Somewhat more challenging, though still considered express preemption, is when a federal law does not state an intent to preempt state laws but is such that preemptive intent is implicit. Even when preemption is express, courts must still identify the scope and substance of federal preemption and preserve state laws to the extent possible.

Courts also imply preemption of state law when there is no express preemption. Conflict preemption occurs when state and federal laws are contradictory such that operation of one frustrates the purpose of the other. Field preemption occurs when Congress regulates a field so completely as to exclude states. The founders clearly intended to establish a sovereign national government and, to at least some extent, a set of uniform laws that could hold the country together as one nation. At the same time, the Constitution reflects the compromise of federalism and preserves a significant role for states in the making of laws and governing of individuals. Federal court precedent, especially from the Supreme Court, has evolved significantly over time on the issue of preemption.



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Taupin Desciple
reply to post by Annee
 


I support local enforcement over federal enforcement. The feds just have a way of screwing things up without even trying. It's the nature of the beast I think. They have such an all-encompassing area both physically and legally that there is no way for them to know what's happening on the local level to the extent where they can be effective at making and enforcing laws. I just don't see that as being possible.




I agree sort of.

Still local sheriffs have to be held accountable for ALL those in their district. Sheriff Joe is very heavy handed on his beliefs. His personal beliefs are not acceptable to all in his district.

It works for those who agree with him.

Where do those who do not agree with him go to get their justice?



posted on Sep, 19 2011 @ 06:09 PM
link   
I am not familiar with the federal laws, but if a law was made or currently exists on a federal level that basically allows the feds to engage in searches etc, then the federal law would trump the state law, as everyone knows. While I think this is a good thing, I highly doubt that it will stop the federal government from doing whatever it wants to do, state law in place or not.

That is the sad truth, but the truth nonetheless. It has gotten to the point where the individual states cannot challenge big-brother, and if they unwisely choose to do so, then it can be guaranteed that big-brother, if they cannot stop it, will throw a tantrum like they did regarding Texas recently. It is utterly ridiculous, but they always get their way.





new topics
top topics
 
81
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join