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

Skip to comments.

Sheriff Maketa releases statement regarding gun control stance
KRDO news ^ | 4 March 2013 | Sheriff Terry Maketa

Posted on 03/12/2013 11:02:03 AM PDT by rfreedom4u

http://www.krdo.com/news/Sheriff-Maketa-releases-statement-regarding-gun-control-stance/-/417220/19280038/-/iykxd7/-/index.html


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: banglist; coloradoguns; communism; communist; coup; guncontrol; leo; secondamendment; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last
I've provided the link as the story is copyrighted by KRDO. Upon reading the sheriff's statement I find it pretty crappy that politicians sink to this level. Not suprosing but crappy.
1 posted on 03/12/2013 11:02:03 AM PDT by rfreedom4u
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

For those behind the “great corporate firewall,” what was said?


2 posted on 03/12/2013 11:03:29 AM PDT by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

He is stating that the legislature is holding pay raises for law enforcement as the carrot to the stick of sheriffs changing their opinions regarding gun control.


3 posted on 03/12/2013 11:05:36 AM PDT by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

That’s only the beginning. Worse is coming. Until we make it stop.


4 posted on 03/12/2013 11:12:27 AM PDT by Noumenon (One individual with courage, determination and a rifle can change the course of history.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

Didn’t Glenn Beck address this the other day? If I heard right, he said to any Sheriff that is having pay withheld, come on the show or contact him...he will (in my words) shin the light on what is going on!!!


5 posted on 03/12/2013 11:19:33 AM PDT by blueyon (The U. S. Constitution - read it and weep)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

Yes, until we make it stop. Check this link from Drudge re California:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-03-12/california-seizes-guns-as-owners-lose-right-to-bear-arms.html?cmpid=yhoo

Yes, it’s California, but LEO’s who want to do so will be using the “mental” aspect more and more as they get into the confiscation swing of things.


6 posted on 03/12/2013 11:24:13 AM PDT by izzatzo (NO MORE BUSHES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u

There are people in this country, indeed right here on FR, who do not believe that our government(s) will attempt to engage our nation’s citizendry with tyranny. I have been told that I am an idiot for thinking that We The People are in danger from our own government by someone here on FR. Folks, the wolves are among us.


7 posted on 03/12/2013 11:28:37 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

Stand with the cops that stand with Americans.....


8 posted on 03/12/2013 11:30:57 AM PDT by rrrod (at home in Medellin Colombia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rrrod

I stand with any American who stands up for the Constitution and our Republic. I’m doing what I can to identify those in my community who will band together against the tyranny of these thugs.


9 posted on 03/12/2013 11:33:39 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

I wouldn’t doubt it, look at McCain. And probably Romney. McCain thinks it “wacko” to worry that 0bama or any president would “drone me, bro”.

Folks, the dividing line is clear.
If you assume benevolence on the part of government, and think it absurd to be concerned about harm coming from government and those doing the governing,
then you’re on the opposite side of the line of the founders.

Think about it. The very Constitution on which this country is based assumes that government is not to be trusted. It must be chained down to protect the people from it.


10 posted on 03/12/2013 11:40:00 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

There are many ‘false flag’ posters on FR. They have been here since the inception of FR.

The false flag posters usually try to protect the status quo. They generally support GOPe and democrat ideas, while claiming to be acting for the good of conservatives.

It is nothing new.


11 posted on 03/12/2013 11:48:26 AM PDT by Triple (Socialism denies people the right to the fruits of their labor, and is as abhorrent as slavery)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Triple

CodeToad and Tigerseye are two who have today repeatedly denigrated me for believing this government capable of implementing tyranny against the people.


12 posted on 03/12/2013 11:55:45 AM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

I generally take some things with a grain of salt. but when it comes to the government I tend to err on the side of caution. Even when they want to do something that is a “good idea” I tend to ask “Is it legal and allowed in the Constitution?”

I try to remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.


13 posted on 03/12/2013 11:56:59 AM PDT by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

history has plenty of dead fools who thought the very same of their governments


14 posted on 03/12/2013 12:17:19 PM PDT by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

How right you are.

The Constitution is not here to protect us. It wasn’t penned to keep the wolves from preying. It’s there to constantly remind We the People of our God-given rights, and how to beat the crap outa domestic marxist enemies, peacefully or otherwise.


15 posted on 03/12/2013 12:18:39 PM PDT by Up Yours Marxists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: izzatzo
The people mentioned in the article all appear to be illegally possessing firearms. Do you think that felons or mentally ill people should be armed?
16 posted on 03/12/2013 12:31:06 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rfreedom4u
Later, I phoned a member of our legislature and expressed concern for what I had witnessed; changing of rules, time limits, new classification of speakers to establish priority and most of all the number of citizens who made the journey to the Capitol in hopes of being heard. I was told the rules did change several times and that this was very unusual. These changes were driven by the majority leadership, Senator John Morse, and the chairperson of the involved hearing committee.

Make no mistake, these Stalinesque tactics are part of a Progressive coup going on all over the country. We have heard that 0bama and Bloomberg both put pressure on CO Dems to push through these anti-2nd Amendment bills. CO is not the only state where this is happening. They have ignored the Bill of Rights, ignored the will of the people, insulted veterans and threatened our country Sheriffs. These people are fascists and they're making their move.

17 posted on 03/12/2013 2:08:05 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
You're a liar. I never said anything to denigrate you. In fact you tried to slap me down hard when I suggested resisting this tyranny. post #46 Now here you are denigrating me behind my back. Who is the mole here?
18 posted on 03/12/2013 2:13:04 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Up Yours Marxists; drypowder; rfreedom4u; Triple; MrB

See post #18.


19 posted on 03/12/2013 2:15:02 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

See post #12 and post #18.


20 posted on 03/12/2013 2:16:58 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
I have been told that I am an idiot for thinking that We The People are in danger from our own government by someone here on FR. Folks, the wolves are among us.

Now, now just calm down, we have this great job all lined up for you, just pack up your kit and get on this train for a pleasant ride to your future home, where you will be happy because work will set you free.

21 posted on 03/12/2013 2:22:44 PM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stormer
Do you think that felons or mentally ill people should be armed?

Do you think another gun grabbing law will prevent them from getting a weapon?

22 posted on 03/12/2013 2:45:24 PM PDT by itsahoot (It is not so much that history repeats, but that human nature does not change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot

I think there are certain people who have demonstrated that they should not own weapons, and I expect the laws (already in place) need to be enforced.


23 posted on 03/12/2013 3:04:00 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

Well, that’s a problem you and the other member need to work out on your own.

It’s our duty to protect ourselves from the government, not the other way around. Governments are filled with self-absorbed, self-preserving nitwits. Makita and others like him are true American Patriots, the real minority here. I agree with his statements 150%.

There are lone wolves in every den. “Trust, but verify”. Keep an eye out on the enemy. Communists/marxists/pinkos are very crafty spies, and they invade like a cancer in every fair town and bastion in this great nation. Mark my words on this. If the SHTF, you’ll find out soon enough who your friends really are.


24 posted on 03/12/2013 3:13:03 PM PDT by Up Yours Marxists
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Up Yours Marxists
It’s our duty to protect ourselves from the government, not the other way around.

I agree completely and have made voluminous posts on the subject. I have no concerns regarding my circle of friends but appreciate your cautions.

25 posted on 03/12/2013 3:16:10 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: stormer
I think there are certain people who have demonstrated that they should not own weapons, and I expect the laws (already in place) need to be enforced.

Just a tad naive, ya think?

They had better luck in nearby Upland, where they seized three guns from the home of Lynette Phillips, 48, who’d been hospitalized for mental illness, and her husband, David. One gun was registered to her, two to him.

“The prohibited person can’t have access to a firearm,” regardless of who the registered owner is, said Michelle Gregory, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office.

26 posted on 03/12/2013 3:17:31 PM PDT by facedown (Armed in the Heartland)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: stormer

“The people mentioned in the article all appear to be illegally possessing firearms.”

From the article:

They had better luck in nearby Upland, where they seized three guns from the home of Lynette Phillips, 48, who’d been hospitalized for mental illness, and her husband, David. One gun was registered to her, two to him.

marktwain notes:

The husband had two legally registered guns. He was not a prohibited possesser, yet his guns were confiscated also, on the grounds that his wife could access them.

This is how slo-mo confiscation works. Overtime, you increase those groups who may not have guns (the wife disputes whether she fits the category given), decrease the types of guns that they can have, until the remnant are so decreased that they are of no political consequence.

We are seeing it happen before our eyes.

Registration is Confiscation

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2012/12/gun-registration-is-gun-confiscation.html


27 posted on 03/12/2013 3:23:31 PM PDT by marktwain (The MSM must die for the Republic to live. Long live the new media!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
...(the wife disputes whether she fits the category given),...

As she should. Being hospitalized for mental illness (a very broad and vague category) is not the same as being adjudicated mentally incompetent. I don't know about CA but that's the standard in most states for restricting someone's civil liberties.

28 posted on 03/12/2013 3:32:42 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: stormer

I don’t necessarily believe anything I read in traditional media because appearances can be deceiving particularly in this day of state controlled media in a state like CA. I was merely using this article as an example of the “mental” allegation by authorities—read a little history of tyrannical, dictatorial regimes(USSR, etal) and you will learn that the “mental” instability allegation has been used before to deal with enemies of the state.

Do you know for a fact what is reported here is the absolute truth and nothing but the truth?


29 posted on 03/12/2013 4:05:09 PM PDT by izzatzo (NO MORE BUSHES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

She was involuntarily committed. I say that means adjudicated mentally incompetent.


30 posted on 03/12/2013 4:15:03 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: izzatzo

Our course not, but I don’t read anything in it that strikes me as onerous. Again, there are certain people that shouldn’t be anywhere near a gun; I don’t have a problem with that.


31 posted on 03/12/2013 4:17:00 PM PDT by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad

“CodeToad and Tigerseye are two who have today repeatedly denigrated me for believing this government capable of implementing tyranny against the people.”

Don’t think so, sweetie. I go after those that claim the power of the government is too much for us to handle and claim we will be slaughtered if we try, as though we should not try. I know better, and I am tired of those that claim we should just shut up and take it because otherwise we are all dead.


32 posted on 03/12/2013 4:17:21 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye; SoldierDad

Well, I wouldn’t characterize SoldierDad as someone who is against patriotic Americans, not at all, but he has been making claims that we will be killed if we try because we don’t have tanks and airplanes.


33 posted on 03/12/2013 4:19:35 PM PDT by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

It’s troll, not mole, and yes, you did denigrate for my view on this issue. Just because YOU don’t see it that way doesn’t make is so. YOU made the claim that the government would never attempt to engage in tyranny, and slapped me for thinking otherwise. Liar? Are you stating you never commented that the government won’t attempt a take-over of the American people? Liar? Really? Read your own words.


34 posted on 03/12/2013 4:21:25 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon

“Viene una tormenta.”


35 posted on 03/12/2013 4:23:21 PM PDT by Lurker (Violence is rarely the answer. But when it is it is the only answer.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Tigerseye calls me a liar, and then you put words in my mouth. Wow. Where did I state that Americans should not fight against the government? Where did I state that we will all be slaughtered if we do? Where did I state anything that was not accurate? Some have stated a belief that the government will NOT engage in a military form of tyranny against the American people BECAUSE we are all armed (which, even if true, which it is not, doesn’t mean that ALL Americans will fight back). This belief appears to stem from the belief that the government knows it would not win in such a campaign. I believe that this government doesn’t give a damn about winning against the people. That is not their aim.


36 posted on 03/12/2013 4:26:56 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: stormer

Just remember:

“First they came for the communists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the socialists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Catholic.

Then they came for me,
and there was no one left to speak for me.”

(Credit the Martin-Niemoller Foundation)

Will legitimate, lawful, sane gunowners be the next target?


37 posted on 03/12/2013 4:30:50 PM PDT by izzatzo (NO MORE BUSHES!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: itsahoot; stormer
Do you think another gun grabbing law will prevent them from getting a weapon?

The current spate of new gun legislation has nothing to do with preventing felons or the mentally ill from having access to firearms. There are already plenty of laws on the books that address those issues. No, the new legislation is for the purpose of disarming law abiding citizens under the guise of "protecting" We The People from ourselves.

38 posted on 03/12/2013 4:32:35 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Related:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2996236/posts?page=1


39 posted on 03/12/2013 4:37:21 PM PDT by RandallFlagg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
You said I made repeated posts to you today. My only post to you today was on this thread more than two hours after you made your accusation. You're a liar.

You say I denigrated you? Here are the only two posts I made to you last night...

To: SoldierDad

See post #44. 175k soldiers and 125k Marines (assuming 100% follow orders and fire on brothers, fathers, mothers, sisters) just aren’t enough to go up against 11 million armed citizens. Won’t happen.

45 posted on Monday, March 11, 2013 11:30:04 PM by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)

-------------------------------------

To: SoldierDad

How many urban bombings do you think the citizenry of this country will tolerate? How many dead lib kids, soccer moms and grannies as collateral damage will they tolerate?

Where did you get the idea that anyone will go out to fight the armed forces?

47 posted on Monday, March 11, 2013 11:49:27 PM by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)

There is no denigration in those posts. You're a liar.

40 posted on 03/12/2013 4:39:22 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: stormer

If a felon has served his (or her) sentence, do you trust them with a knife? Baseball bat? Tire iron? Can of gasoline? Car? Rope?

Any of those can be used to kill.

Some in large numbers at one time.


41 posted on 03/12/2013 4:40:09 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: stormer
I say that means adjudicated mentally incompetent.

OK, Judge stormer. LOL

42 posted on 03/12/2013 4:40:15 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
Well, I wouldn’t characterize SoldierDad as someone who is against patriotic Americans, ...

Neither would I but he made that hysterical claim about us so ... what's good for the goose ...

43 posted on 03/12/2013 4:42:11 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
YOU made the claim that the government would never attempt to engage in tyranny,...

There is another lie. Show us all that post.

44 posted on 03/12/2013 4:43:02 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
Where did I state that Americans should not fight against the government? Where did I state that we will all be slaughtered if we do?

What was this post supposed to convey?

To: TigersEye
How many M1A2's do you have in your garage? How many fighter jets do you have available to resist the Feds with? How many bunker busting bombs might you have access to? How many nukes? 300,000 troops with the technology they have to unleash against We The People, who have NO such weapons gives them an edge. And, that is only counting the Army and Marines, leaving out USAF and Navy numbers.

If what I'm reading about the GOP "elites" moving towards making deals on gun control with Obozo has any merit, then We The People are in deep kimshee.

46 posted on Monday, March 11, 2013 11:44:24 PM by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)

I guess you were denigrating me for post #45

45 posted on 03/12/2013 4:48:13 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

It was claimed that the government will not start a war against the American people BECAUSE “WE” were to heavily armed. My statement was pointing out that the government, technologically speaking at the very least, outguns the American people, and thus are NOT worried about starting a shooting war against “WE”. YOU insinuated that I was foolish for thinking this as a possibility. I never claimed that “WE” would cower against the government, but that the government will not fear starting a shooting war. If you believe “WE” are immune to the possibility of our own government engaging “WE” militarily, then you have deluded yourself. There are members of the “GOP” who are not friends to the American people. Is that inaccurate? Very few in the DemocRAT party are friends to Americans. Is that inaccurate? The military firepower that this government has at it’s disposal is/can be devastating to the American people, with little reciprocity on our side. Is that inaccurate? A drawdown in military forces does NOT mean that this government is less likely to use force against “WE”. The American people being up against a tyrannical government Hell bent on subjugation of “WE” places the American people at risk. Is this inaccurate? The fact that my views have been sumarily dismissed as impossible was the denigration. The fact that this government cannot be trusted is real, and should not be derrided. You’re free to have any view you care to have, about the realities of the world we live in today, or about me. I’m finished with this.


46 posted on 03/12/2013 5:14:58 PM PDT by SoldierDad (Proud dad of an Army Soldier who has survived 24 months of Combat deployment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
It was claimed that the government will not start a war against the American people BECAUSE “WE” were to heavily armed.

Not by me.

47 posted on 03/12/2013 5:16:28 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
YOU insinuated that I was foolish for thinking this as a possibility.

I already proved that that was a lie. I insinuated nothing.

48 posted on 03/12/2013 5:18:02 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
If you believe “WE” are immune to the possibility of our own government engaging “WE” militarily, then you have deluded yourself.

I never said anything of the kind.

49 posted on 03/12/2013 5:19:08 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: SoldierDad
I’m finished with this.

Not if you continue to drag this to other threads, lie about me and fail to ping me.

50 posted on 03/12/2013 5:20:26 PM PDT by TigersEye (The irresponsible should not be leading the responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 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