Western US Sheriffs gather to discuss their Constitutional authority.

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by GD21D

 

State Constitution perhaps...not the Federal Constitution.

Sheriffs are just regular people outside their county; at the very most they are treated cordially within their States. Federal Agents are Law Enforcement Agents where ever they may be in this land.

That's what the Sheriffs are so upset about. They want to determine if there are some greater powers they can achieve and there are not. their job is to serve summons', write traffic tickets and babysit shoplifters.

Leave defense to the men.

What doesn't make sense is some guy in Arizona thinking he can challenge the President of the United States.

edit on 12-6-2012 by michaelbrux because: (no reason given)

I have to lol at this nonsense...

You say they have no more authority than as a citizen of the US....

GUESS WHAT???? NO ONE in this country has ANY more authority than what they have as citizens of the US.

ESPECIALLY the president.

Every citizen of the Federal Army is required to disobey any unlawful order even from the president...Their oath is to uphold the constitution.

If YOU took that oath and you FAIL to uphold it, then YOU sir, are a traitor to the US which is We the People of the US.

What a joke.

I have seen much of what you have posted and most of it just makes me think you are a government shill.

Jaden

Originally posted by Masterjaden

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by GD21D

 

State Constitution perhaps...not the Federal Constitution.

Sheriffs are just regular people outside their county; at the very most they are treated cordially within their States. Federal Agents are Law Enforcement Agents where ever they may be in this land.

That's what the Sheriffs are so upset about. They want to determine if there are some greater powers they can achieve and there are not. their job is to serve summons', write traffic tickets and babysit shoplifters.

Leave defense to the men.

What doesn't make sense is some guy in Arizona thinking he can challenge the President of the United States.

edit on 12-6-2012 by michaelbrux because: (no reason given)

I have to lol at this nonsense...

You say they have no more authority than as a citizen of the US....

GUESS WHAT???? NO ONE in this country has ANY more authority than what they have as citizens of the US.

ESPECIALLY the president.

Every citizen of the Federal Army is required to disobey any unlawful order even from the president...Their oath is to uphold the constitution.

If YOU took that oath and you FAIL to uphold it, then YOU sir, are a traitor to the US which is We the People of the US.

What a joke.

I have seen much of what you have posted and most of it just makes me think you are a government shill.

Jaden

at least we got it straight that sheriffs have no constitutional authority. the constitution doesn't even mention anything called a sheriff. federal law doesn't know what the hell a sheriff is.

its just a bunch of guys with guns and a badge and a temporary job that live under a blanket of protection that they did not create.

people should uphold the Constitution and cherish it. its the only Law we have.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by ObservingTheWorld

 

Wow! That is really great news for the people who live in those jurisdictions! Sadly, my Sheriffs department in the county I live in, seems to have already been federalized.. Seriously, all they do is deliver court documents and transport criminals.

I am surprised that Sheriff Richard Mack isn't on the agenda though...

S&F not many people care about this kind of news, but I most certainly do!

I hate to say it but they need crazy Joe Arpaio.He may be nuts but he will draw the media.

That is just 5 hours from me, I wish I had known sooner. I would have made plans to take the trip out there.

reply to post by michaelbrux

at least we got it straight that sheriffs have no constitutional authority

You are actually wrong on this one. The Constitution limits the power of the Federal Government, it does not spell out the rights and priviledges of citizens or states. The Bill of Rights is an enumeration of rights that intrinsically belong to the People so that no Federal law can encroach upon them.

The Costitution also states that any power that is not granted to the Federal government specifically by the Constitution belongs to the States, or to the People.

Sherrifs are law enforcement officers who are ELECTED by the people, not appointed. Elected officials ALWAYS have more authority than appointed or hired officials.

And now we see the beginning divide. The Constitution of the United States is universal, it's something all agents of government, federal or state give an oath to uphold and defend. It's the law they're all supposed to abide by. The very law that the Federal Government has trampled all over.States have no rights any more right? This is quite evident in the medicinal use of that particular substance that shall not be named. It's OK for federal agents to go into a state and raid a facility in which said state has made legal through their own legislative process? Please show me where in the constitution it says this can be done.I hope that these are the type of issues being discussed. Over reach by the federal government is getting out of hand. It's becoming a totalitarian style system. At this point Federal Government can override state laws regardless if it's constitutional or not. Everyone needs to toe the line with the Fed Gov't or be removed.The Constitution is the authority, not the Federal Government.

county sheriffs and juries are the last best defence against federal and state encroachement

Now the question becomes even greater; who will stop criminal and out-of-control government from killing, abusing, violating, robbing, and destroying its own people? Yes, believe it or not, there is an answer to this one. The duty to stop such criminality lies with the county sheriff. The question needs to be posed to each and every sheriff of these United States; will you stand against tyranny?

The office of sheriff has a long and noble history. It dates back over a thousand years and originated in England. The sheriff is the only elected law enforcement official in America. He is the last line of defense for his citizens. He is the people's protector. He is the keeper of the peace, he is the guardian of liberty and the protector of rights. A vast majority of sheriffs will agree with all of this until they are asked to apply these principles of protection to federal criminals. Their backpeddling and excuses will be more plentiful than radar tickets and louder than sirens at doughnut time. Most of the unbelievers, who themselves have taken a solemn oath to "uphold and defend" the U S Constitution, will passionately and even apologetically exclaim that they have no authority or jurisdiction to tell federal agents to do anything, let alone stop them from victimizing local citizens. The truth and stark reality is that it's just the opposite; the sheriff has ultimate authority and law enforcement power within his jurisdiction. He is to protect and defend his citizens from all enemies, both "foreign and domestic."

Of course, there are those who will maintain that the feds have not and will not commit crimes against law-abiding citizens in this country, the IRS notwithstanding. For the sake of argument, let's just pretend that the government did nothing wrong at the Branch Davidian church in Waco or at Ruby Ridge, Idaho when citizens were killed. Those incidents have been debated and will be forever. However, the immutable truth about both tragedies remains that if the local sheriff had remained in charge of both incidents, not one person would have died, including federal agents, and the law would
still have been enforced.

constitutionallawenforcementassoc.blogspot.ca...

reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar


This guy doesnt seem to be able to understand that we are actually a republic and that states have rights and within those states, the counties have rights as well.
Doesnt matter, ive dealt with him before in other threads and he rarely, if ever, makes any sense

reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar


yeah, i read the Constitution once or twice.

i've also read stories about the type of discourse this is we are having. been there, done that.

you guys can try and spin the idea of insurrection and civil war and call it something else, but it is what it is.

because civil war in this country is not possible at present, i'm not even going to make a big thing about it.

but its important that the young people that frequent this site and read these threads be able to identify the type of conversations that lead to situations where their lives are destroyed and rights truly stripped.

the people we are...but the people having these conversations don't have any armies, they don't have any legitimacy and they don't have a ice cube's chance in hell of being successful at being anything other than what they are and they should be happy and take a nap or something.

I wouldn't get my hopes up. Foriegn troops are in place

reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar


sheriffs are nothing special. their states are swamped with debt and every government in this land is little more than a debtor in possession.

maybe they should be having a meeting to figure out how they are going to pay back all that money they borrowed.

reply to post by ObservingTheWorld


You and many many others me included locked and ready!

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar

 

sheriffs are nothing special. their states are swamped with debt and every government in this land is little more than a debtor in possession.

maybe they should be having a meeting to figure out how they are going to pay back all that money they borrowed.

Ok dude, first of all, a little lesson. Sheriffs are the elected law enforcement leaders of a County, not a State.
The State Attorney General is the Elected Leader over the State Police and over him is the Governor.
Then it filters down to the Municipal level.
Where in the hell did you go to school man? FFS

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by LifeIsPeculiar

 

sheriffs are nothing special. their states are swamped with debt and every government in this land is little more than a debtor in possession.

maybe they should be having a meeting to figure out how they are going to pay back all that money they borrowed.

The idea of debt is nothing special, nothing more than a fallacy to enslave people and make them obligated. Maybe the Federal Government should worry more about producing jobs so the people could pay off those debts, and worry less about diminishing states rights.Maybe if the Federal Gov't actually cared about it's people there wouldn't be so much rising discontent. But alas, it's all about profit. Not the rights and freedoms of average people.

Is it a coincidence that in each of the states where you have a belligerent Sheriff or group of Sheriffs that they are spending more than collecting in Tax revenue and have a debt ratio near 20% of state GDP?

All this 'states rights', and rogue presidents is disinformation designed to deflect attention from the fact that those states are in a fiscal situation that cannot be fixed other than through war and its completely obvious.

Go ahead, read if for yourself.

Do these sheriffs actually think they are the first people to behave in manner when faced with an insurmountable debt? of course you're mad.

www.usdebtclock.org...

www.usdebtclock.org...

www.usdebtclock.org...

reply to post by ObservingTheWorld



Quite the joke:

It is nice to see our local authorities standing up for the Constitution.

Local "Sheriffs" do NOT speak for an entire STATE!

States' rights are defined within the United States Constitution.

This is just a bunch of hogwash, a raft of fools going off half-cocked.

Cue the sound: garble-garble-garble-Birth Certificate!!-garble-garble-garble...... (Et Cetera....)

Nothing new here.

reply to post by michaelbrux

Do these sheriffs actually think they are the first people to behave in manner when faced with an insurmountable debt? of course you're mad.

Youre comparing a County Law Enforcement Official with a State official that has control of the states GDP?
Where the hell is the logic in that?
Yea, either your just a troll or youre stupid beyond belief.

My question would be, what took them so long?? If this was a concerted effort to "Defend the Constitution" they would have had this meeting ALONG TIME AGO!!!

reply to post by Juggernog


Counties are still subdivisions of States and the point is that these counties pay salaries and operate with borrowed money and they don't ever see that the situation can change. So they've decided to make excuses that serve one purpose...to get out of having to pay their bills to the people they owe.

people are 'locked and loaded' and such other nonsensical concepts. they've got their bugout bags ready...they're hoping mad and ain't gonna take it no more...i get it.

but what you are mad about is the situation you created for yourself.

all this has happened before...you guys will be just the most recent to want to go on a killing spree in an effort to change your situation...its not really original.

Originally posted by michaelbrux
What doesn't make sense is some guy in Arizona thinking he can challenge the President of the United States.

What doesn't make sense is when the people of a state (such as Colorado) pass MMJ laws, and the Federal Government thinks it can come in and circumvent what THE PEOPLE determined to be legal, and arrest people for using MMJ. Same applies for concealed carry, gay marriage, or any other laws that the people of a given state vote in that allows people MORE freedom. Personally, I'd love to see my local Sheriff arrest, and charge with false imprisonment or whatever law applies, any federal agent who comes into Colorado to arrest a Colorado citizen for using their MMJ license within the law VOTED in by the people of the State of Colorado.

Full disclosure: I voted "yes" for MMJ, but will vote "no" for just anyone to possess it when it comes up for a vote in November. Secondly, I don't use it.