Skip to comments.In rural America, some sheriffs vow to defy Obama on gun control
Posted on 01/18/2013 6:39:47 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
A vocal contingent of rural lawmen and red-state lawmakers say they won't go along with any new federal crackdowns on the ability of law-abiding Americans' to own guns, and that they'll even side with residents against federal authority in any gun seizure cases resulting from looming gun-control measures.
Remarking on "worrisome times," Sheriff Stacy Nicholson of Georgia's Gilmer County writes on Facebook that "I, along with a large number (which is growing daily) of Sheriffs across the state of Georgia as well as the entire United States, have no intention of following any orders of the federal government to perform any act which would be considered to be unlawful or a VIOLATION OF ANY PART OF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OR THE CONSTITUTION OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA, nor will we permit it to be done if within our power to prevent it."
On Wednesday, the president proposed an ambitious package of what he called "common sense" gun-control laws in response to the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre and other mass shootings in recent years. In addition to 23 executive orders, President Obama urged Congress to pass a new assault-weapons ban, a ban on high-capacity magazines, and a requirement for universal background checks of gun buyers.
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
Since we are talking about Federal gun laws, most don’t have the authority to enforce them anyway. Note that they pulled the authority of Sheriff Joe to enforce Federal immigration laws. Most sheriffs, except those in progressive areas, would decline and would probably impede the Federals. Without sheriff cooperation, the Feds would have a very hard time enforcing the laws. Some police departments might try, but sheriffs generally are the top law enforcement agency within a county and can negate the local police. Not impossible in major progressive cities and areas, but very much more improbable in non-progressive and rural areas.
In my reading of the Constitution I have never read anything that gave me the impression that the Federal Government had any police powers in the states outside of time of war.
So to my mind the Federal government must rely on local or state law enforcement if they wish to execute a federal warrant.
If the local law enforcement refuses to assist the federal LEO I do not see how they could be compelled to do so.
Thank you, Sherriff Nicholson.
Legally I agree with you.
But I’m afraid zero is trying to turn the DHS into his Civilian National Security Force.
I’m pretty sure my area of the country wouldn’t take to kindly to them showing up.
I’d like to see them try actually.
Unfortunately few sheriffs in this country have the guts to stand up to federal LEOs.
Unless Zero is willing to send out the U.S. Marines, he might as well give it up. We’ll wipe the floor with feds.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.