Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Western US Sheriffs gather to discuss their Constitutional authority.

page: 3
69
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:36 PM
link   
Here a problem though...

This feels like a setup.. painting a "red herring" on those who attend as well as many of the sheriff's attending..

Remember a little old thing called the "census?".. you know, the one were they have all the GPS coordinates of every building in all 50 states by now?...

Hooked to a drone overhead, and you have instant surveillance of the sit'rep..

Including license plate recording, remote laser acoustic recording, even LIDAR looking for underground hot spots..

Wanna bet this will become headline news in the worst way?...

You don't announce an event that involves what the NSA,HSA, CIA, FBI has deemed a "terrorists action, by mentioning the Constitution, unless this is ruse to gather more probable suspects that are on a watch list, and that includes Sheriff's as well (off the range law enforcers)...

I hope people are smarter then this to show up at be counted for termination status if so decided...

Old saying:

"If it fits your most desired wishes, is when one should remain the most "suspicious"...

Tread lightly if you approach such an event people, and "watch your 6, 9, and 3"...




posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3
 


i don't support any type of activity that puts the federal government up against the states. anyone that does is quite obviously under the command of a foreign power and a traitor.

all of these issues are fake and the people supporting them know it.

its really a shame that some of you would love to see states act aggressively towards the federal government over the issues you mentioned.

its all bullcrap and you all know it.



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:43 PM
link   
reply to post by michaelbrux
 


Liberty is not "bull crap". I'm all for the Federal Government stepping in and FREEING people from oppression, and adding MORE liberty to people, but when a state decides to add liberty, and the Federal Government becomes an oppressor, we have a problem.

Don't you think the people of any particular state should be able to decide how they want to live, so long as they aren't infringing on someone else's freedoms? Or, do you subscribe to the thought that we should just eliminate states, since they have no real meaning, and just let the Federal Government run everything?



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by LifeIsPeculiar
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.


This is what I was gonna say, the 10th amendment provides the backing for these sheriffs. Since no guidance is given in the US Constitution about sheriffs, the states and the people are within their full legal right to form the position of, elect, and give power to a sheriff. You know, since they are duly elected by the PEOPLE and not just subversively installed like so many of our "officials" within the federal government.

This conference is a good thing in my opinion, although whether or not it will accomplish anything remains to be seen.

And to be intimidated by your own president...that's just nonsense. The office of POTUS is to serve the people that elected him, not lord over and oppress them. Sheriffs included. No one should be afraid of a "republican" government (republican being the FORM of government, not the political party).
edit on 6/12/2012 by Planechump because: quote fixin'



posted on Jun, 12 2012 @ 11:51 PM
link   
edit on 12-6-2012 by Juggernog because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3
 


i don't support any type of activity that puts the federal government up against the states. anyone that does is quite obviously under the command of a foreign power and a traitor.

all of these issues are fake and the people supporting them know it.

its really a shame that some of you would love to see states act aggressively towards the federal government over the issues you mentioned.

its all bullcrap and you all know it.

I don't want to see states act aggressively against the Federal Gov't. I want to see the Federal Gov't honor the states rights. What's so hard to understand? Lets look at this another way. I don't want to see Fed Gov't monopolize education, health care, income taxes ect. Those are things the states should handle. If you don't like how Florida does things move to Colorado. I guarantee if you let states handle health care, one of them is going to figure out a good cost effective model of doing things, and when other states see the success they'll more than likely follow that model. If they don't they'll lose their population, thus revenue. As long as they're abiding by the constitution what's the problem?Why does the Fed Gov't have to monopolize everything? Why do they have to have their hands in everything. Is it any wonder why education is in such a poor state. Every time they get their hands on something they F it up. EDIT: Proofreading is my friend.
edit on 13-6-2012 by GD21D because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Planechump
 
Isnt POTUS also threatening the Supreme Court regarding Obama Care?? When does this nonsense stop. We have lived in this constructed box for too long now. Wake up People. Lets all become "segregated with beliefs and ideas" when were all fighting for the same thing. But thats the point, RIGHT!!! They Win.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:03 AM
link   
this whole things reads like a paraphrased version of this sorcha faal hoax from the other day



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by michaelbrux
 
So, what do States rights mean to you. If the States dont agree with the Government what do States rights mean anyway.

If thats the case, why not become the US Union instead and get rid of all States Borders and not have any States at all. What is the Point??

edit on 13-6-2012 by hoochymama because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:17 AM
link   
So Sheriffs have no authority...accept to deputize people to augment their ability to enforce the county laws they are to uphold.If the laws are the will of the citizens of the county and the Federal government is not allowed to supercede these laws INSIDE THE COUNTY until such time as the citizens vote them the powers to do so.
So if Joe DHS shows up with a warrant to arrest an individual or a Federal Marshal doesn't notify the sheriff of their activity they could face arrest when they enter the county.
according to current law structures right?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by michaelbrux
reply to post by navy_vet_stg3
 


i don't support any type of activity that puts the federal government up against the states. anyone that does is quite obviously under the command of a foreign power and a traitor.

all of these issues are fake and the people supporting them know it.

its really a shame that some of you would love to see states act aggressively towards the federal government over the issues you mentioned.

its all bullcrap and you all know it.



"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

The Constitution has as its skeleton (framework) within it, the Declaration Of Independence it Is the "results" of this document, as well as the Bill Of Rights which is also held within it's laws as amendments, that allow you today, to voice your opinions so openly, otherwise we would never be able to say anything without approval "legally".....

The states are "Constitutionally Bound" to hold steadfast with their own citizens "first" above and beyond what the federal government wants, as it is the "will of the people" not the government or the states, that determine any internal matters, by "Constitutional Laws"..

I'm not sure you are even aware that Washington D.C. is "NOT" part of the sovereign u.s. itself... The original territory was sold off to the government (Maryland is I remember correctly) whereupon the seat of government sits, which is "not" in the u.s...

That the government land (Washington- District Of Columbia, not America) has it's entire holdings, titles, mineral rights, everything about that plot of land, wholly owned by the "Virginia Company", which is where they copped the trademark (TM), called "U.S.A" or United States of America, a ploy on words like the "federal reserve" is, or the IRS by political posturing to being part of the government (all without an actual federal seal BTW)

I support people wanting to stand up, and take their rights back from an oppressive governmental reign, and the Declaration Of Independence give us the "rights" to do so if it becomes necessary...

I'm more concerned right now, with this obvious "red herring" presentation done, because that's like announcing to ATF a new drug's manufacturing location with all the codes to get in.. (Not smart IMHO)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by cavtrooper7
 


on a thread somewhere a guy named Durshewits?? and the Harvard Law society,, they would be able to be more ,,yes/no.

thread on ATS somewhere.?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   
Just the fact that they are sitting down to talk to openly discuss, with the citizens, the constitution is F'in awesome.

Everyone should know the constitution and be involved with watching for the government to over step their rights. The government (plutocracy/oligarchy now) is trying all they can to up root the document that rules them.

Why would they be trying to up root it unless they want to drastically violate it????
( i used the word "drastically" because they already have violated it in small, indirect, and on the line ways.)



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:34 AM
link   

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


I think Michael is just stating a fact. I don't know much about law, but every cop movie I've ever watched shows how a cop from one state is not a cop once he crosses a state border. Is this NOT true?



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 


Dude, he is all over the place but yes what you said is true.
What the issue is though is just the opposite, the legality of feds coming into state or county jurisdiction.
He seems to think that a Sheriff is a State lawman or something, idk.
Hes really kind of ignorant of how the country is supposed to break down.
Fed/State/County/Municipality, etc...



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ObservingTheWorld
 


All I ask is you fight the right people. The rich! They lobby and influence government and will do so locally too.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by muse7
The western slope conservative alliance? Big red flag right there.

I'd rather have the federal government have the final say on everything, instead of a group of sheriffs that are part of a conservative alliance.


Let me guess...you also oppose the state governors getting together and suing the federal govt for their overreach on Obamacare.

Yay for states rights.



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 03:14 AM
link   
The role of the sheriff is to defend and protect the constitution on a local level. The difference between a representative in Washington and a county Sheriff is that the Sheriff stays in the county that he or she represents. He's a federal representative on local soil, for lack of a better way of putting it. Because of this fact, he or she holds more power than a Federal Marshall who comes to a local jurisdiction to make a federal level arrest or even to serve papers.

wetexans.com...

U.S. Marshalls enforce federal laws within districts. There's something like 90 of them. Because of this, there are fewer of them than there are county sheriffs. For example, Indiana has 2 districts, with upwards of 100 counties each, each with their own Sheriff. Nebraska on the other hand is a district in and of itself. This is why a county sheriff is going to have more authority than a U.S. Marshall within that county. A Sheriff protects the constitutional rights of people from an overreaching Federal government on a local level, whereas a Marshall is protecting the interests of the federal government on a street level as well. This is why a Sheriff can DETAIN a bank robber from 3 states away, but a Federal Marshall or the F.B.I., whoever gets to him first really, are the only ones who can actually arrest and transport him. It's usually the F.B.I that arrests, and the Marshall who transports. The thing is, Marshalls have larger jurisdictions than Sheriffs do. They can make higher profile arrests than Sheriffs can, but they have to get a Sheriff's permission to do so.

I hope that clears a few things up.

If you have any questions about any of this, go straight to the source:

www.usmarshals.gov...

www.usmarshals.gov...



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
This is very encouraging news to hear! Like so many people have said in past threads/comments etc.., it really comes down to states rights in my opinion. If so many states weren't so attached at the hip to the federal government and could somehow make way on their own, mind you it wouldn't be easy at the beginning then I think we might have a good start at some sort of salvation as a country. Lately, as many others I have been very depressed with the crap going on. It's very easy for any one man/woman to say, "Oh, this is what needs to happen in America etc..." however this battle goes way beyond any one man/woman. This battle will take EVERYONE in this country in some way or another coming into agreement simultaneously that a SERIOUS and IMMEDIATE change is needed. Until and if we reach that point I fear that we are F^%$ED! More than likely my words kick at a dead horse, but they must be reiterated nonetheless.. Bless you all ATS family..I..



posted on Jun, 13 2012 @ 06:29 AM
link   
this is encouraging news really. you have to start somewhere when it comes to putting your foot down against the federal government.






top topics



 
69
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join