General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSome sheriffs vow not to enforce Obama's gun plan..who the fuck do they think they are?
Denny Peyman didn't watch President Barack Obama's gun-control announcement Wednesday. But the Jackson County, Ky., sheriff said he already knows how the proposals will affect the way he does his job: not one whit.
Peyman is one of several sheriffs across the country who are vowing not to enforce new firearms restrictions that could be imposed by Congress or by executive order.
"Kentucky is a sovereign state," Peyman told NBC News. "The federal government is coming in and saying, 'This is what you're going to do.' We're not going to do it."
The White House's wish list includes an assault-weapons ban. Peyman said if it comes to pass, he won't be part of any crackdown.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/16/16547387-some-sheriffs-vow-not-to-enforce-obamas-gun-plan-anti-violence-groups-praise-measures?lite
PDJane
(10,103 posts)The ones with the power, the privilege, and the ignorance.
spanone
(135,861 posts)bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)They don't have to enforce a federal law as local officers, but they may not interfere with federal agents enforcing federal laws in their communities.
OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)galileoreloaded
(2,571 posts)lapfog_1
(29,219 posts)and the "wrongful death" lawsuits when it is proved that they didn't enforce the law and could have.... will both personally bankrupt them and professionally ruin them.
geomon666
(7,512 posts)Ok. Immediately cut all federal funding to that state. Problem solved.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)Like Colorado and Washington when they legalized marijuana.
johnfunk
(6,113 posts)That is all.
Nuclear Unicorn
(19,497 posts)People cannot claim in one breath that states are obliged to enforce federal law and then in the next breath cheer when another law directly contradicts federal law and then again get angry when states like Arizona pass laws such as SB1070.
I would also add that Obama passed no law yesterday, only policies regarding federal agencies, which sheriffs are not beholden.
malaise
(269,157 posts)Permanut
(5,625 posts)Add Sheriff Tim Mueller to the list. This clown is an embarrassment to our blue state.
http://www.registerguard.com/web/news/cityregion/29310102-57/laws-mueller-gun-sheriff-county.html.csp
johnfunk
(6,113 posts)... started talking about these sheriffs' "tyranny" in refusing to protect the public -- and suggested that perhaps "second amendment remedies" might be in order?
Ironic on many levels -- but I'd love to see it happen just for the sheer cognitive dissonance.
riverwalker
(8,694 posts)Minn. Sheriff Vows to Ignore New Gun Restrictions
A Minnesota sheriff says he would refuse to enforce any new state or federal regulation that restricts guns.
Pine County Sheriff Robin Cole sent an open letter to residents this week, saying he doesn't believe the federal government has a right to order states to follow mandates that violate the U.S. Constitution.
Cole wrote that he would view any such mandate illegal and refuse to carry it out. He says he believes it is a "moral sin" to erode freedom through administrative rules.
Cole told The Associated Press on Wednesday that he is categorically opposed to any proposal that would infringe on one's constitutional rights. He says he wrote the letter because citizens have been afraid of what the future holds.
He says the issue doesn't apply to just guns.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Racist pricks
struggle4progress
(118,330 posts)so I regard folk who make statements like Peyman as babbling yahoos: since they're not federal agency employees, a presidential executive order is unlikely to apply directly to them; and since they're not federal law enforcement officials, they will often have no obvious immediate duty to enforce federal laws (though Congress, of course, does have significant authority to impose conditions on various forms of federal funding; and some cooperation between various law enforcement officials under different authorities is frequently desirable)
So what is Peyman's jabber really about? Under the current Kentucky constitution, county sheriffs are elected every four years: the natural conclusion is that Peyman is just a yammering political airhead, throwing red meat to his potential constituents
defacto7
(13,485 posts)The most dangerous, self serving, lawbreakers and club boys of all government positions. I would no more trust a Sheriffs or officials in the sheriffs office than I would the mafia.
Erose999
(5,624 posts)"and I'm gonna take that one drop at a time!!1!11!"
http://www.ohio.com/polopoly_fs/1.344799.1351118745!/image/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_500/mailbag25cut-02.jpg
true story :lol:
chloes1
(88 posts)that have written statements to the effect that they will not enforce Federal laws in regards to gun control. I thought then and still believe that, since sheriffs are elected, the little bastards are trying to get popular votes.
big babies with the little penii all of them!
Remmah2
(3,291 posts)nt
Jeff In Milwaukee
(13,992 posts)I'll take "Members of the Republican Base" for $500, Alex...
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)arthritisR_US
(7,291 posts)for the office of the President
warrior1
(12,325 posts)Flashmann
(2,140 posts)It worked with seatbelt laws.....The Fed threatened to cut hi-way funding to states which refused to enact seatbelt laws.....They did the same thing,earlier,with regard to the National 55MPH speed limit......
That said,I suspect there would be legalities,as well as logistical concerns,in cutting all Fed funds to states not in compliance.......Unlike the seatbelt-highway funding,dynamic,I'm not sure there would be a specific area in which to target threatened funding cuts......
I'd love to think that could be a workable approach,though......
*Mis-spelled word...
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)We shall see who has the last word on these matters after their trollling is long forgotten.
frylock
(34,825 posts)sorry, but no more tanks or drones for you mister sheriff sir.