Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US sheriff raps officers who say they'd ignore gun control laws they see as constitutional
Ottawa Citizen ^ | 1/22/2013 | Dan Elliott

Posted on 01/22/2013 7:51:50 PM PST by Washi

DENVER -- The Colorado sheriff whose county includes the movie theater where 12 people were shot and killed last year says law-enforcement officers have no right to ignore gun-control laws unless the courts rule them unconstitutional.

Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson issued a statement Wednesday criticizing police and sheriff's officials who have said they would not enforce gun-control laws they consider unconstitutional.

...snip...

For a law enforcement official to claim that authority would be the equivalent of police officers or deputies deciding that people they arrest are guilty and sentencing them to jail, he said.

(Excerpt) Read more at ottawacitizen.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banglist; colorado; constitution; guncontrol; guns; secondamendment; sheriff
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last
Bull crap.

If a law enforcement officer enforced a law was obviously un-Constitutional, it would be analogous to a military officer following orders that are obviously unlawful, and then claiming he was "only following orders".

That didn't work our too well for Lt. Calley in the Mi Lai hearings.

1 posted on 01/22/2013 7:52:01 PM PST by Washi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Washi

Pu$$y!


2 posted on 01/22/2013 7:53:03 PM PST by x1stcav (Man up! We're all going to have to become Samuel Whittemores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

I eagerly await this sheriff’s enforcement of Federal Marijuana laws in the great state of Colorado.


3 posted on 01/22/2013 7:53:33 PM PST by rwilson99 (Please tell me how the words "shall not perish and have everlasting life" would NOT apply to Mary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi; Reaganite Republican; Clintons Are White Trash; HerrBlucher; mgist; raptor22; victim soul; ..
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

4 posted on 01/22/2013 7:53:38 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi; Reaganite Republican; Clintons Are White Trash; HerrBlucher; mgist; raptor22; victim soul; ..
+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

5 posted on 01/22/2013 7:54:11 PM PST by narses
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwilson99

Yes and i want to see him enforce federal immigration laws in his state.


6 posted on 01/22/2013 7:56:48 PM PST by fatrat (extremely extreme right-wing radicalized veteran)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Washi
Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officer Association

CSPOA.ORG

OATHKEEPERS.ORG

7 posted on 01/22/2013 7:58:22 PM PST by ThermoNuclearWarrior (www.OathKeepers.org/oath/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
they have as more right as a state that doesn't enforce ILLEGAL INVADER laws!!!
8 posted on 01/22/2013 7:58:27 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

I don’t know why anyone can object to LEOs not enforcing laws they see as UNconstitutional, when our Commander-in-Chief seems to simply ignore enforcing constitutional laws he doesn’t like.


9 posted on 01/22/2013 8:01:34 PM PST by Jeff Winston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
unless the courts rule them unconstitutional...

Do these LEOs pledge their oath to a court? or, to the Constitution? It's either one or the other!

10 posted on 01/22/2013 8:02:29 PM PST by C210N (When people fear government there is tyranny; when government fears people there is liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
law-enforcement officers have no right to ignore gun-control laws

Don't see why not. The administration has made it clear that that it sees fit to enforce or not enforce laws at its option,.

11 posted on 01/22/2013 8:02:32 PM PST by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Call me when you worry about all the officials who openly told LEOs to ignore immigration laws, for years now.


12 posted on 01/22/2013 8:03:10 PM PST by the OlLine Rebel (Common sense is an uncommon virtue./Technological progress cannot be legislated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

.

Barack Hussein Soetero-Obama duh IInd and Attorney General Eric Holder said they are ignoring the “Defense of Marriage Act” because they say “it is not Constitutional” -

.


13 posted on 01/22/2013 8:12:33 PM PST by devolve ( ---- ---- ---- -CHEESEBURGER_CHEESEBURGER_CHEESEBURGER- ---- ---- ---- ---- John Belushi ---- ----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

For a law enforcement official to claim that authority would be the equivalent of police officers or deputies deciding that people they DETAIN ARE NOT GUILTY AND LET THEM GO.

Fixed the statement.


14 posted on 01/22/2013 8:13:02 PM PST by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Its a good thing they are identifying who is a friend and who is a foe now.


15 posted on 01/22/2013 8:13:26 PM PST by Mechanicos (When did we amend the Constitution for a 2nd Federal Prohibition?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
"For a law enforcement official to claim that authority would be the equivalent of police officers or deputies deciding that people they arrest are guilty and sentencing them to jail, he said."

Or for a jury to decide a law is not valid ... y'know ... like .. in jury nullification ??

Who are ordinary people to decide for themselves what is law and what isn't ?

Stuff it, sherriff.

16 posted on 01/22/2013 8:14:40 PM PST by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Robinson sounds like he might be one of Barry’s boys.


17 posted on 01/22/2013 8:19:26 PM PST by FlingWingFlyer (If it saves just one senior citizen's life, the fight against ObamaCare will have been worth it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel

The immigration law in question, the 1987 INA, specifically prohibits non-enforcement or modification, yet here we are.


18 posted on 01/22/2013 8:19:56 PM PST by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Who needs a court to tell them what “shall not be infringed” means?

I don’t, sheriff, and I’m not going to obey tyrants.


19 posted on 01/22/2013 8:25:20 PM PST by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Just the sort of sonofabitch soetoro is looking for.


20 posted on 01/22/2013 8:28:05 PM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: anyone

There’s your Eichmann.


21 posted on 01/22/2013 8:31:51 PM PST by guido911 (Islamic terrorists are members http://www.freerepublic.com/foof the "ROP", the "religion of pu*&ies")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Come try and take my Tyranny Response Rifle copper !


22 posted on 01/22/2013 8:32:22 PM PST by Newbomb Turk (Freedom is my F word.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

This sheriff needs desperately to be removed from office.


23 posted on 01/22/2013 8:33:18 PM PST by editor-surveyor (Freepers: Not as smart as I'd hoped they'd be)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson

Great job you did there at the theatre, Grayson. Hope you didn't lose too many donuts in responding. Good for you it happened in a gun free killing zone, eh? Otherwise, chalk-lining and reporting would be so yesterday, eh?

Pfffft.

24 posted on 01/22/2013 8:34:46 PM PST by glock rocks (Pro Deo et Constitutione - Libertas aut Mors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Sheriff Robinson is just achin’ to be removed in the next election.


25 posted on 01/22/2013 8:35:56 PM PST by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

OK then sheriff Robinson why didn't YOU stop the killing in your county? Why didn't you prevent it to start with? You want to be the grand protector? You best start protecting each and every citizen and if they are harmed then you should be held responsible. Where were YOU? Where were your deputies? Only minutes away right? With innocents citizens in a Gun Free Zone. You just don't get it. You go to sleep with firearm protection in your home as does your deputies. You likely go out shopping carrying the same so do they.

Enjoying your ruling class status and ruling class privileges? What makes you more special than me? The oath you took? Laws must be Constitutional otherwise they are tyranny. Enforce the Constitution including yourself abiding in the rights stated within it and the Unconstitutional laws will take care of themselves. You have no legal authority or right to violate the Constitution of the United States including the Second Amendment.

26 posted on 01/22/2013 8:37:31 PM PST by cva66snipe (Two Choices left for U.S. One Nation Under GOD or One Nation Under Judgment? Which one say ye?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: the OlLine Rebel
Call me when you worry about all the officials who openly told LEOs to ignore immigration laws, for years now.

How many mayors, governors, police chiefs, judges, etc., have declared this?

This has been happening for many years now...Government only enforces the laws they want to enforce and the reason the U.S. now has upwards of 20+ million illegals running through it's streets, yet they are now concerned with law abiding Americans while attempting to limit or undermine their constitutional rights?

Total chaos... This just reeks...

27 posted on 01/22/2013 8:37:55 PM PST by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Uhm, no. You as the local constable can decide to let federalies in or not.

Clearly police were following the law during Jim Crowe enforcing unjust laws, while many others ignored it.


28 posted on 01/22/2013 8:39:10 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
The Law these days is all about selective enforcement.

There are so many laws, changing at a rapid rate, that it's impossible for anyone to know them all, though ignorance of any of them is to the state's benefit.

29 posted on 01/22/2013 8:41:26 PM PST by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

“unless the courts rule them unconstitutional”

Yeah, they have the only say because...um...they just do.


30 posted on 01/22/2013 8:53:48 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knarf

What an idiotic argument. Is it possible people, officers of the law especially, don’t know the criminal justice system assumes innocence unless proved otherwise, and that false imprisonment is a greater wrong than letting the guilty go free? Did it never occur to him why the burden of proof is on the state?

Not that I go all the ACLU way. It is unjust not to punish the guilty, and getting guilty people or less than what they deserve is wrong. Of course we don’t know who is and isn’t guilty, and defense attorneys plug their ears lest clients admit what they’ve done so they don’t have to knowingly obstruct justice. It’s an abstract theoretical process for them, with the knowledge that in at least some of the cases actual, practical justice is served.


31 posted on 01/22/2013 9:05:58 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Washi

He should brush up on “separation of powers.”


32 posted on 01/22/2013 9:06:52 PM PST by coloradan (The US has become a banana republic, except without the bananas - or the republic.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Don’t you worry your pretty little head Sheriff..we’ll handle anything that concerns the Second Admendment...your part of ‘government’ so you kiss O’s butt and leave the big stuff to us the ‘PEOPLE’....


33 posted on 01/22/2013 9:08:55 PM PST by HarleyLady27 (Get the USA out of the UN then get the UN out of the USA; send bamaboy back to Kenya ASAP!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
I don't think this Imaho County Sheriff has spent a day as a cop but he has all his tickets punched:

Grayson Robinson

Grayson Robinson is Sheriff of the Arapahoe County (CO) Sheriff’s Office, a position he has held since 2002. He also serves as the Vice President/Vice Chairperson for the Commission. Sheriff Robinson is actively involved with the National Sheriffs’ Association and currently serves on the Legislative Affairs, Counter Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction, and Accreditations, Detention and Corrections committees. He is also a member of the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the Police Executive Research Forum.

He has a Bachelor’s degree in business administration and a Master’s degree in public administration from the University of Colorado. Sheriff Robinson also is a graduate of the FBI National Academy, the FBI Law Enforcement Executive Development Seminar, and the State and Local Executives Program at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government

34 posted on 01/22/2013 9:09:54 PM PST by VeniVidiVici (Bathhouse Barry wants YOU to bend over for another four years)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

“So here we are. Imagine where we’ll be.”


35 posted on 01/22/2013 9:10:19 PM PST by chulaivn66 (Semper Fidelis in Extremis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: coloradan
He is a fitting replacement for Pat Sullivan. That sheriffs department is a big reason why Aurora sucks.
36 posted on 01/22/2013 9:16:40 PM PST by MileHi ( "It's coming down to patriots vs the politicians." - ovrtaxt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Washi; All
There is some merit in what the sheriff is saying.

However, the sheriff may be unaware of jury nullification. Jury nullification is when a jury returns a verdict of "not guilty" for somebody who has broken a law on the basis that the jury thinks that the law is a bad or stupid law. (Note that jury nullification is not the same thing as establishing a case precedent which applies to everybody who breaks the questionable law. Jury nullification affects only the case the jury is deciding.)

And I also think that the sheriff needs to be made aware that the Supreme Court has already clarified that the purpose of the 2nd Amendment is to restrict Congress from making gun control laws which the Court recognizes as the job of state and local authorities.

"The second and tenth counts are equally defective. The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is called, in The City of New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 139, the "powers which relate to merely municipal legislation (emphases added), or what was, perhaps, more properly called internal police," "not surrendered or restrained" by the Constitution of the United States." --United States v. Cruikshank, 1875.

37 posted on 01/22/2013 9:26:47 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Oh really? does that mnean they have to enforce federal immigration laws now?


38 posted on 01/22/2013 9:34:13 PM PST by RC one (.From My Cold Dead Hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Why can’t they ignore them? They ignore immigration laws.


39 posted on 01/22/2013 9:52:53 PM PST by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
Arapahoe County Sheriff Grayson Robinson

There is a name for the watch list. Thankfully my county Sheriff did sign the letter about not enforcing un-Constitutional FedMob gun laws.

40 posted on 01/22/2013 9:54:10 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
"Sheriff Robinson is just achin’ to be removed in the next election appointed as the next Director of the ATFE."

Fixed it for ya'.

41 posted on 01/22/2013 9:55:44 PM PST by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Well, we know who the traitors are.


42 posted on 01/22/2013 10:19:32 PM PST by 444Flyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

“...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,”

Suck it, sheriff....it’s an inalienable human right.


43 posted on 01/22/2013 10:22:19 PM PST by Psycho_Bunny (Thought Puzzle: Describe Islam without using the phrase "mental disorder" more than four times.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rwilson99

“I eagerly await this sheriff’s enforcement of Federal Marijuana laws in the great state of Colorado.”

It seems obvious already that he is smokin’ funny stuff.


44 posted on 01/22/2013 10:24:18 PM PST by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a Tea Party descendant...steeped in the Constitutional Republic given to us by the Founders.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Washi
"Robinson said he supports gun rights under the Constitution's Second Amendment, which has been interpreted by courts to protect individual gun ownership."

These things weren't meant to be interpreted by courts! The test is quite simple:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

In other words, you can't just make up new stuff. "...shall not be infringed" is the most simplistic way it can be put into words. It doesn't say anywhere "...shall not be infringed, EXCEPT...".
A SCOTUS interpretation is not legit and the sheriff, who is the ultimate authority, can choose to ignore your federal demands. <==(Note the period at the end there...)

45 posted on 01/22/2013 10:24:55 PM PST by FunkyZero (... I've got a Grand Piano to prop up my mortal remains)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

Any hungry hogs in Colorado?


46 posted on 01/22/2013 10:39:23 PM PST by S.O.S121.500 ( Nothing so vexes me as a Democrat above ground...ENFORCE THE BILL OF RIGHTS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi
For a law enforcement official to claim that authority would be the equivalent of police officers or deputies deciding that people they arrest are guilty and sentencing them to jail, he said.

Sheriff, you're a damn fool!

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation which would abrogate them."

U.S. Supreme Court in Miranda v. Arizona 380 U.S. 436 (1966)

"Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be."

U.S. Supreme Court in Westbrook v. Mihaly 2 C3d 756

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."

U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

“Every law consistent with the Constitution will have been made in pursuance of the powers granted by it. Every usurpation or law repugnant to it cannot have been made in pursuance of its powers. The latter will be nugatory and void.”

(Thomas Jefferson, Elliot, p. 4:187-88.)


47 posted on 01/22/2013 10:51:44 PM PST by TigersEye (Stupid is a Progressive disease.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Washi

[[The Colorado sheriff whose county includes the movie theater where 12 people were shot and killed last year says law-enforcement officers have no right to ignore gun-control laws unless the courts rule them unconstitutional.]]

BS they don’t have that right- The gvoernment works FOR THE PEOPLE- and when the govenrment FORGETS this FACT the peopel have every right to ignore the government and even to cut off funding-

Several years ago the govenrment tried enacting some insane ‘law’ of the land, and sevral states REFUSED to comply, and hte government was forced to recidn their assinine ‘law’- the government needs to udnerstand that the states do NOT bow down to them- and that the government’s job is to SERVE THE PEOPLE- NOT the other way around


48 posted on 01/22/2013 11:47:39 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

[[”Constitutional rights may not be infringed simply because the majority of the people choose that they be.”]]

Hell the minority of peopel in places liek cali ny and mass have infact ifnringed o nthe people’s rights many many many times- but the peopel there don’t udnerstrand that they have a RIGHT to defend their constitutional rights when their govenrment decides to violate them or infringe upon them-

NY gun ownwers right now need to stand up and say colelctively that the gun law their gov just enacted are null and void and shall not be obeyed because the ifnringe upon their right to self defense (I’ve just heard that they are ifnact doign so- hopefully this will boil down to the outcoem where their gov will lose and lose badly so that the rest of the states see that peopel ARE ifnact not goign to stand for injustice and vioaltions to their rights

It’s just like the newspaper printign the names of gun owners in ny- it was just fien and dandy when they did it to gun owners, but when the tabvles were turned, they ran and hide (armed no less) because they got a taste of their own medicine- Bullies don’t liek it when their victims fight back


49 posted on 01/22/2013 11:56:03 PM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: virgil

[[Why can’t they ignore them? They ignore immigration laws]]

Because they are hypoctites who are above the law, and who say ‘do as i say, not as i do- or else face a long stretch in prison’ These thugs are the ones who shoudl be doign prison time for their sedition agaisnt the US- they are actively and with force- destroying this country, and their anti-americanism is on display for all to see-


50 posted on 01/23/2013 12:03:08 AM PST by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-60 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson