Skip to comments.White House Demands American Sheriffs Enforce Gun Control
Posted on 03/29/2013 1:25:10 PM PDT by EXCH54FE
click here to read article
Not like it’s the top priority over murder and assault and other felonies. It’s the bottom priority, if they have the time.
I face a similar challenge, we must not upset Dear Leader.
Demands, demands, demands.
Sorry you two bit wanna be dictator, you aint gettin your way this time.
Pathetic pile of dung.
The White House is starting to sound like that fat kid over in North Korea. Hey Jay, why not release a photo showing how DC will fire drone missiles at Sheriffs who do not comply with the demands from the Socialist Dictators.
White Hut demands - really demands. So what if the sheriffs do not comply - Now I get it the Dept of Homeland Security will show up with the MRAP vehicles, and expend some of the ammo purchases in that county. watch out Oklahoma they will be coming after you first just like the health exchanges. The Feds have chosen 1 state to isolate and ram everything through there first and foremost. If the state does not comply - annihilate the people in the state and spread from there - strike fear in America’s heartland.
Obama on enforcing Federal Marijuana law, “We have bigger fish to fry.”
Isn't that the operation procedure of a communists dictator? Can't see to get the title of communists black Muslim to stick. Maybe the uninformed are still in denial.
“Strange times we live in when the US government is at war with the citizens, but that is what we got right now.”
That’s a fact.
Trial by his peers? In his /her county? Yeah, right.
But leave the illegals (a.k.a. undocumented democrats) alone. The country is in the hands of fools.
“...In fact, they reflect the presidents commitment to (destroy) our Second Amendment rights. (my parenthesis)
How can these people make such ridiculous statements without laughing out loud?
Can't have it both ways
An excellent and salient point. Unfortunately, since law means nothing to the power-hungry mobsters currently running the federal leviathan, they WILL have it both ways.
They’ll enforce them on me; I wouldn’t trust any LEO with my guns, never.
No. It is more like the senseless rantings of a dictator who is powerless outside his own borders.
General proposition, Mr. Carney!? The Executive branch of the government is responsible for enforcement of ALL laws. Although, your regime likes to pick and choose which laws to enforce...
You know, Jay, like voting rights, or maybe DOMA, or maybe gun smuggling and killing without due process? I could go on...
This regime reminds me of King George.
I have stated many times, and I will no doubt state it many more, that one should never use the term "law" to describe an illegitimate statute. Laws are, by definition, legitimate; hence, unconstitutional statutes are not laws. A statute which is contrary to the Constitution does not become illegitimate merely as a consequence of a court's declaring it to be thus. Nothing in the Constitution says that Congressional legislation shall have unlimited authority between the time it is passed and the time a court strikes it down.
It's ironic that Marbury v. Madison has been misread both as giving Courts carte blanche to make things Constitutional or not, and as giving Congress and the Executive carte blanche to do whatever they want until such time as the Court orders them to stop. The Marbury v. Madison claim that the Court's job is to say what the law means is true, but that doesn't mean that whatever the Court says should be deemed law. If the Court decides a case in conformance with all applicable laws (including the Constitution), then what the Court says and what the laws mean will be one and the same thing. If the Court decides a case in a manner that isn't in conformance with applicable laws, however, what it says and what the law means would differ.