53 Colorado Sheriffs Sue State Over Gun Control Laws

In a deliberate move to catch gun control activists off guard, an organization representing Colorado sheriffs in a lawsuit over a series of recently passed gun control laws abruptly announced the filing of the suit in federal court today.

“We did that deliberately,” David Kopel, an attorney with the Independence Institute, which is handling the case, said. “We wanted to catch our opponents who support gun control off guard.”

As recently as Wednesday, the Independence Institute was suggesting the filing was still a few weeks off. Appearing at a rally against another bill, Amy Oliver Cooke, wife of Weld County Sheriff John Cooke, said they were planning to file the suit in the next couple of weeks.
The suit, which was filed in federal district court, lists 54 out of the state’s 64 sheriffs as plaintiffs in the case.

Kopel says what is significant to note is that while not all sheriffs are party to the suit, not a single sheriff has come out in opposition to it.

Cooke had harsh words for critics in the media and others who questioned whether a government official should sue another government official.

“Some in the media … asked me if I think it’s a good idea or if it’s appropriate for [a] government official to sue another government official. My response is unequivocally yes. It is our duty and responsibility as sheriffs to protect the people who elected us and whom we serve.”

At a recent event in Fort Collins by the Independence Institute providing updates on the case, Cooke said he was proud that gun control supporters are nervous over the lawsuit.
“When we announced our opposition to these gun control laws, the Greeley Tribune ran a story titled, ’48 Sheriffs going Rogue on Guns,’” Cooke said. “They should be fearing us. What right does the state have dictating how many rounds of ammunition [a woman] can have to defend herself?”

The lawsuit isn’t just limited to law enforcement officials, but lists a variety of organizations including the Colorado Farm Bureau, which has expressed concerns about rural farmers and ranchers having to deal with predators, Women for Concealed Carry, and the Colorado Outfitters Association.

“We have a diverse number of plaintiffs in this case. We are celebrating diversity,” Kopel said. “The difference is we actually believe in genuine diversity.”
Cooke noted that the lawsuit was not a partisan issue, with Republican and Democratic sheriffs both taking part in the lawsuit.

“This is not about urban versus rural as the governor likes to portray it,” Cooke said. “We have rural and urban plaintiffs in this case. It is about the Constitution. It is about the 2nd and 14th amendments. The suit is about our way of life, our freedoms, our rights, our liberties which transcend political affiliation and place of residence.”

Within minutes following the announcement of the filing of the suit, Republican Atty. Gen. John Suthers, who will be defending the state in the lawsuit, finally issued a statement providing guidance to law enforcement on how they are supposed to enforce the new laws.

Under the existing laws, any magazine that holds greater than 15 rounds, or can be modified to hold greater than 15 rounds, is now illegal to purchase in the state. The problem is nearly all magazines are designed with features that make them readily expandable to hold more than 15 rounds. The law’s wording effectively bans all magazines in Colorado.

Suthers said in the guidelines that magazines “must be judged objectively” and that a magazine holding 15 rounds or fewer cannot be defined as “large capacity” just because it can be modified to hold more.

While those currently possessing magazines greater than 15 rounds, the law prevents the transfer of any of these magazines. The wording states the grandfather clause only applies as long as the holder “maintains continuous possession” of it. Cooke and other sheriffs have pointed out that based on this wording, anyone who gives their magazine to a gunsmith or asks for help on a shooting range with a jammed magazine is now violating the law.

Suthers said “an owner should not be considered to have transferred a large capacity magazine or lost continuous possession of it simply by handing it to a gunsmith, hunting partner, or an acquaintance at a shooting range.”

However, the problem is Suther’s statement is just what it says, guidance, and it does not hold the force of law. Any officer can choose to disregard Suther’s recommendations anytime he chooses in favor of the plain text of the law.

The lawsuit also claims the gun control measures violate the Americans with Disabilities Act as well as individual civil rights.

Dylan Harrell, one of the disabled plaintiffs in the case, said his disability, which confines him to a wheelchair often makes it more difficult for him to defend himself or his family. He also noted that as an outdoorsman, when exiting his vehicle he needs help.

“I often request the assistance for the safe handling of my firearms anytime I am transferring from a wheelchair to an ATV or another vehicle,” Harrell explained. “It is now against the law for me to even seek assistance anytime I am transferring my firearms for my wheelchair to another vehicle. I am filing this lawsuit on the half of all Coloradans with disabilities such as my own.”
The suit noted that disabled citizens often find it difficult to change magazines quickly, which could be a serious threat to their life if their weapon is needed for self-defense.

Colorado’s far left government this year is controlled by Democrats in the governor’s office, in the House and the Senate. They rammed through a number of gun restrictions and limits – at the behest of the White House.

During debate over the gun control measures, the vast majority of citizens testifying before the legislature were opposed to any new gun control laws. However, frequently their testimony was dismissed and treated with disdain by Democratic lawmakers who seemed to have already made up their minds about passing the laws.

State Sen. Evie Hudak, D-Westminster, scolded a witness opposing one of the gun restrictions.

Amanda Collins, 27, of Reno, Nev., was telling her story of being assaulted and explained that had she been carrying a concealed weapon, the incident might have ended differently.
“I just want to say that, actually statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun,” Hudak scolded. “And, chances are that if you would have had a gun, then he would have been able to get that from you and possibly use it against you.”

Hudak continued, speaking over the committee witness, “The Colorado Coalition Against Gun Violence says that every one woman who used a handgun in self-defense, 83 here are killed by them.”
Finally able to resume her testimony, Collins said, “Senator, you weren’t there. I know without a doubt [the outcome would have been different with a gun].
“He already had a weapon,” she told the meeting of the Senate State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee. “He didn’t need mine.”

A similar attitude was displayed by state Rep. Joe Salazar.
He said that a woman who feels threatened by rape on a college campus doesn’t need to be armed because she can use a call box to get help.

Salazar’s statement came in a debate over a proposal to ban citizens possessing a concealed-carry permit from being armed on university campuses.

“It’s why we have call boxes,” said Salazar, “It’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at.

“And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around, or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody.”

Perhaps the most surprising statement came from U.S. Rep. Diane DeGette, a Denver Democrat who displayed her perspective on gun magazines.

“I will tell you these are ammunition, they’re bullets, so the people who have those now they’re going to shoot them; so if you ban them in the future, the number of these high capacity magazines is going to decrease dramatically over time because the bullets will have been shot, and there won’t be any more available,” she said.

The Denver Post said DeGette didn’t appear to understand that a firearm magazine can be reloaded with more bullets.

State officials admitted they were doing the bidding of the White House. In February, Vice President Joe Biden flew to the state to strong-arm Democratic lawmakers who were feeling pressure from their constituents to vote against the bills.

“He (Biden) said it would send a strong message to the rest of the country that a Western state had passed gun-control bills,” Tony Exhum, a Democratic lawmaker from Colorado Springs, told the Denver Post.

House Majority Leader Mark Ferrandino, an open homosexual who also pursued a “civil unions” agenda this year, admitted the gun-control bills introduced by fellow Democrats had national implications.

“I was shocked that he called. He said he thought the bills could help them on a national level,” Ferrandino said.

Sheriffs Against Obamacie

The great usurper of the Constitution, President Obama, is seeking to obliterate the Second Amendment and subsequently, he is coming after your guns. Obama is not coming after your guns in one fell swoop, although he would like to.Inch by inch, Obama believes that gun confiscation is a cinch.

 He is employing the principle of incrementalism. Under this communist despot, Americans will see registration and prohibition today, followed by confiscation tomorrow.

Democide, defined as murder by government, in the 20th century, accounted for 262,000,000 deaths. Nearly everyone of these mass murders by government was preceded by gun control and gun confiscation. Logic, wisdom and historical precedent would indicate that Americans would be foolish to ever surrender any of the Second Amendment rights to the federal government.

I am one of a growing group of Americans who believes that what I have dubbed Obamacide (i.e. the continual takedown of the Constitution and replacing it with Marxist Communist ideals), will be followed by democide which will be perpetrated against the American people by the minions who represent and serve the bankers who have hijacked our government.

A Pro-American Message From An Unlikely Source

Former California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger, a man of very limited acting skills, recently returned to the big screen as Sheriff Ray Owens, a tough law man who leads a band of an inexperienced small town police officers who face the daunting task of stopping a ruthless drug cartel leader from reaching the US-Mexico border.

As an aside, some men gracefully age and understand the importance of choosing age appropriate activities, hobbies and vocations. Apparently, Schwarzenegger does not possess that kind of introspective awareness. This “grandpa on steroids” approach to reliving his days as an action hero, was very comedic, but only in a very tragic way. More to the point,

Schwarzenegger’s character portrays one of America’s last remaining heroes, the County Sheriff. You might be wondering about the name of Schwarzenegger’s newest action movie? Never mind, you would be better off saving your money and buying some more ammunition.

 The only saving grace of this very bad movie lies in the expressed belief that the County Sheriff is America’s last line of defense in a community and that the federal government, if not always corrupt, is always incompetent.

America’s Last Remaining Heroes

The County Sheriff is the indeed the last line of defense against a tyrannical government which is undeniably hell-bent on destroying the Second Amendment for very nefarious purposes. Here are some very poignant examples



In response to the national gun-control/confiscation debate, Sheriff Denny Peyman of Jackson County in Kentucky stated in a recent press conference that his power as sheriff, charged with upholding the Constitution, constitutes his most important to the citizens of Jackson county and that Peyman is unconcerned with the hidden, and often illegal agendas of state and federal agents. Peyman further explained that

 “I can ask federal people to leave, they have to leave. I can ask state people to leave, they have to leave. And it doesn’t matter what new laws Obama passes, the sheriff has more power than the federal people.”



Illinois Clark County Sheriff, Jerry Parsley, posted a message from the Clark County Sheriff’s Office Facebook page this past Thursday explaining his mission to protect the Constitution. “It’s a given to me; the Second Amendment isn’t about hunting. The amendment is about a free state’s ability to defend itself from an oppressive government. When a government won’t or can’t defend its citizens, they have a God-given right to protect themselves. To me it’s simple.”

The Utah Sheriffs’ Association has written a strongly worded letter to President Obama on the issue of gun control. Part of the letter reads, “No federal official will be permitted to descend upon our constituents and take from them what the Bill of Rights—in particular Amendment II—has given them.”

In Oregon’s Josephine County, Sheriff Gil Gilbertson said Wednesday that a lot of sheriffs are standing up and demanding the Constitution – especially the Second Amendment – be followed.



Frank Deming, the Johnson County Sheriff is sounding off against President Barack Obama’s new gun control proposals. Denning discussed the mass shootings in Colorado and Connecticut, but says he sees nothing in the proposed measures that could prevent similar incidents in the future. “Logic dictates to us that armed individuals; whether armed private individuals or hired security personnel, are the answer to prevent future tragedies in those places that we have inadvertently made free-fire zones with the totally useless ‘No Guns Allowed’ signs,” Deming continued.



In Minnesota, Pine County Sheriff Robin Cole sent an open letter to residents saying he did not believe the federal government had the right to tell the states how to regulate firearms. He said he would refuse to enforce any federal mandate which he felt violated constitutional rights, specifically the Second Amendment.

I  received a recent email from Sheriff Richard Mack, former Graham County, AZ. Sheriff, who successfully challenged the Brady Bill before the Supreme Court. Mack’s email detailed for me his efforts, as an Oathkeeper, to remind Sheriffs across the country to uphold the Second Amendment.

Even A Governor “Gets It”

In Mississippi, Governor Phil Bryant, urged the Legislature to make it illegal to enforce any executive order by the president that violates the Constitution.

“If someone kicks open my door and they’re entering my home, I’d like as many bullets as I could to protect my children, and if I only have three, then the ability for me to protect my family is greatly diminished,” Bryant said. “And what we’re doing now is saying, ‘We’re standing against the federal government taking away our civil liberties.’” At least one politician is not on the take.

Evil Never Takes a Holiday

MA. Representative, the Democidal David Linsky, has filed a bill which, among other things, forces gun owners to undergo mental health background checks, acquire liability insurance, pay an additional 25% tax on all forms of ammunition, and requires firearms categorized as “assault weapons” to be stored outside of their homes and only at government approved storage depots. In my estimation, this is only an intermediate step with the final destination being the nearly complete destruction of the Second Amendment followed by gun confiscation.



Of course this man shipped guns into Mexico in an attempt to undermine the Second Amendment under Operation Fast and Furious.



This woman allowed the murder of Ambassador Stevens by refusing the Ambassador’s request for additional protection following his gun running into Syria on behalf of the CIA in this Middle East version of Fast and Furious in which tens of thousands have already been murdered.



This man oversaw Operation Fast and Furious which resulted in the death of Border Patrol Agent, Brian Terry, 40,000 Mexicans last year and 300 Americans.  This man also oversaw the stand down orders which could have prevented Ambassador Stevens death/assassination. And this man wants to disarm you while he is responsible for the murders of hundreds of thousands human beings.

Yesterday, I purchased a gun and some ammunition. I have drawn my line in the sand. I stand for the Constitution and in particular, the Second Amendment. As the President continues to commit Obamacide, I have decided that I will not obey. I will not follow Obama’s gun control policies as issued by 23 illegal and unconstitutional executive orders. I will not submit to ANY form of federal tyranny committed against the Constitution.

And in my role as a journalist, I refused to be silenced as I will continue to publicly decry the criminal communist takeover of this country by this creation of the modern-day version of the Weathermen Underground terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dorne and their puppet-in-chief, Barak Hussein Obama.



If we submit to this unconstitutional and illegal authority, we will become vulnerable like never before in our nation’s history. I would encourage everyone to write today to their local sheriff and demand that he defend the Constitution and in particular, the Second Amendment against unwarranted federal government interference. I would encourage you to act as if your life depends on it, because it does.

Trust NOT Your Federalized Sheriff & How To Tell The Difference

"You look depressed."

"I was lamenting. I’ve lost my innocence."

"You lost that some time ago. If you've only just noticed, it can't have been very important to you."

Exchange between Thomas Cromwell – the Machiavellian Lord Chancellor of England – and Richard Rich, an ambitious functionary who had sold his soul in a buyer’s market, from A Man for All Seasons.
"I will not enforce an unconstitutional law against any citizen of Smith County," insisted Sheriff Larry Smith. 

The sheriff wants his constituents to believe that he would refuse to participate in a federally mandated gun grab, or permit one to be carried out by federal officials within his jurisdiction. Yet ten days before Smith offered that assurance, his office had taken part in an early-morning SWAT rampage throughout East Texas in which 73 warrants were served as part of the federal government’s patently unconstitutional war on drugs.
During a December 2011 campaign debate, Smith said that he wanted to "invest more resources" – that is, redirect wealth plundered from the productive – into a "Drug Task Force," and insisted that under his administration the Sheriff’s Office would embrace a "Task Force mentality" in dealing with law enforcement issues. 

The problem with the mindset Sheriff Smith was extoling should become obvious once it’s understood that the German term for "task force" is einsatzgruppe. By their actions many multi-jurisdictional task forces in contemporary America are increasingly faithful to their historic pedigree. 

Smith’s devotion to narcotics task forces might be the residue of his early law enforcement career, which included two years as a special agent for the Drug Enforcement Administration – an agency that could be considered the mentally deficient stepchild of the CIA, which is the world’s largest narcotics syndicate. 

Twenty years ago, an ATF einsatzgruppe launched a murderous raid against an isolated religious group at Mt. Carmel outside Waco. The warrant they were enforcing was clotted with falsehoods. The investigation that produced it was haphazard. Its target, Vernon Howell -- aka David Koresh -- was suspected of trivial violations of federal firearms regulations, and had indicated his eagerness to cooperate with ATF investigators to clear the record. 

If an arrest were to be carried out – and one was neither necessary, nor justified – it could have been performed during one of Koresh’s frequent solitary jogging expeditions, or one of his routine visits to town. Instead, the ATF – seeking a dramatic, high-profile enforcement action to generate headlines for the scandal-plagued agency – staged a paramilitary assault on the religious sanctuary.

 They did so even though the raiders had lost the element of surprise, and when they arrived at Mt. Carmel they opened fire on the building despite the fact that an unarmed Koresh had confronted the stormtroopers with his hands up, pleading for them not to shoot.

Four ATF agents were killed during that Sunday morning raid. Their deaths were utterly unnecessary, and entirely well-deserved: They were attempting to murder innocent people, and the would-be victims acted within their rights in using deadly force to defend their homes against that assault. The criminal clique that had sent the ATF to attack the Davidians sent a larger contingent to lay siege to their residence, and eventually arranged for the holocaust that annihilated 76 people, including seventeen small children.

Like most gun owners in Eastern Texas, Smith can remember where he was the morning of April 19, 1993, when the Mt. Carmel refuge went up in flames. He was on the scene as an agent of the ATF, which he had joined in 1989. Smith believes that the initial ATF raid on the Davidians was justified, and that the entire operation was at least a partial success. It’s doubtful that his assessment is shared by many gun owners in his jurisdiction.

Larry Smith is among dozens of sheriffs who have gone on record in opposition to the Obama administration’s impending firearms restrictions. All of them have promised to intervene to protect their counties from federal tyranny. And all of them are active collaborators in the same.

Kieran Donahue was sworn in as the new Sheriff of Canyon County, Idaho on January 14. Three days later he joined the ranks of "refusenik sheriffs" by promising not to implement any federal gun policy at odds with his responsibility to "uphold the Constitution."

Unfortunately, that resolute statement of principled defiance was fatally undermined when Donahue – in the same press conference -- expressed his willingness to continue his office’s collaboration in the federal "war on drugs" and displayed his indecent eagerness to accept new federal subsidies to deploy deputies to guard public schools as soon as the funds are available.

Wendy Olson, the official assigned by the regime to act as the federal regime’s legal sub-commissarina for Idaho, has said that her office will fully comply with new federal firearms mandates. She pointedly noted that the Canyon County Sheriff’s Office – like most others in the country – has officers who are cross-deputized to serve on federal einsatzgruppen. During last year’s campaign the future sheriff proudly boasted of his work as an "undercover officer" with the FBI-supervised METRO Violent Crime and Gang Task Force.

"In these changing and difficult economic times it is a great benefit to have all law enforcement agencies working together in order to share costs and resources," insisted Donahue. Those words will almost certainly come back to haunt Canyon County gun owners when – not "if" – the Feds make it clear that they are willing to "share resources" only with sheriff’s offices who are on board with the gun grab.

Donahue insisted on playing coy about the fact that he’s for sale. Fresno County Sheriff Margaret Mims was shameless. She told the local ABC affiliate that while she will not enforce unconstitutional gun laws, she also "backs the added funding for local law enforcement, especially in schools." 

Her office has a huge budget, a small but significant portion of which is derived from proceeds seized through a federally supervised "asset forfeiture" program. 

In 2009, Mims was the "local" face that was pasted onto the Obama administration’s "Operation Save Our Sierra" marijuana crack-down, which was personally supervised by federal Drug War Commissar Gil Kerlikowske. This campaign involved 300 personnel from local, state, and federal agencies – including military pilots that flew Black Hawk helicopters over targeted areas. The manpower and hardware were deployed in a mission best described as militarized horticulture. It’s quite easy to see how the personnel and assets used against "illegal" plants could be employed to confiscate "illegal" firearms in the future. 


A few years ago, when Mims and her department faced a $4 million budget deficit, the Fresno County commission had to scrounge up $10.6 million in plundered funds to prevent layoffs in the Sheriff’s Office. That money most likely won’t be available next time Sheriff Mims wants to avoid handing pink slips to her deputies. It’s quite easy to imagine a scenario in which her federal supervisors will introduce her to a new variety of alchemy -- converting confiscated "illegal" firearms into federal subsidies. 

Four sheriffs in Oregon have announced their opposition to the renewed campaign to disarm citizens. Among them is Sheriff Brian Wolfe of Malheur County (who, in the interests of full disclosure, is a childhood friend). In a letter to Vice President Biden, Sheriff Wolfe declared: "I believe that the Constitution stands above all laws and executive orders of this Country. I want to be very clear that no one employed on our team at the Malheur County Sheriff’s Office will enforce or support any laws or executive orders that are not consistent with the Constitution of this great land." 

If only those inspiring words were consonant with Sheriff Wolfe’s actions. Like every other sheriff in the country, Brian Wolfe violates the Constitution on a routine basis. 

Last August, the Malheur County Sheriff’s Department casually announced that it had found several small marijuana gardens during a two-week aerial surveillance operation conducted with the help of the National Guard.

Acting as the department’s official stenographer, the Argus Observer newspaper reported that Sheriff Brian Wolfe will now "contact property owners and acquire search warrants if needed." Warrants would not be necessary, Wolfe observed, if the property owners consented to the searches. The Sheriff pointed out that the plants may be part of legal medicinal marijuana operations, or could have been planted without the owner’s knowledge or consent.

At this point an actual journalist would have asked Wolfe why his office was conducting warrantless aerial searches of private property without probable cause. After all, the Sheriff has admitted that none of the property owners was a criminal suspect.

The Malheur County Sheriff’s Department spends part of each summer arresting marijuana plants – that is, dispatching its SWAT team to barren locations in rural Oregon to clear out patches of marijuana.
Sheriff Wolfe insists this is necessary to "protect the public," which is more acutely threatened by the unconstitutional, paramilitary operations of his own department.

 Wolfe’s department spends a great deal of time seizing contraband and prosecuting people who possess it. That experience will prove quite useful when – once again, not "if" – the Feds decide to treat legally owned firearms as illicit contraband. 

There isn’t a single county sheriff’s office in the country that hasn’t compromised itself by accepting federal funds, and collaborating in unconstitutional federal enforcement operations. They’ve long since lost their innocence, but are pretending that they’ve just noticed that fact.

Nothing in the U.S. Constitution authorizes the Feds to prohibit the consumption of narcotics or any other substance. Indeed, last time the Feds undertook a campaign of national prohibition, they had to change the Constitution in order to do so. Unless they’re investigating charges of treason or counterfeiting, sheriffs should not collaborate with the Feds – and in such circumstances the Feds themselves should be treated as the primary suspects.

If you take the nickel, you take the noose. If a sheriff’s office receives so much as a farthing of federal funding, it will be subject to federal mandates. That principle was underscored about seven years ago in the case of Josh Wolf, a 24-year-old video blogger imprisoned for refusing to turn over a portion of footage he shot of tumultuous street protests during the G-8 summit in San Francisco.
The Feds claim that Wolf, who spent two-thirds of a year in prison on civil contempt charges, possessed footage of a police car being set on fire. Wolf maintained that he didn’t have the material the Feds were after, and that under California's very liberal journalist shield law, he wasn’t required to turn over his confidential, unpublished material. A Federal District Court Judge ignored Wolf's argument and incarcerated him in a detention center in Dublin, California for contempt.

The alleged assault on a San Francisco police car would be a municipal matter, and the California shield law is obviously a question of state law. Why was this dealt with in a federal court?

As Time magazine pointed out: "The Feds say they have jurisdiction over the case because the police car is partly U.S. government property since the SFPD receives federal anti-terrorism money."

Note well that the Feds didn’t claim that the regime paid for the specific cars that were reportedly destroyed, only that the police department had been subsumed into the federal law enforcement apparatus because it had received some quantity of Homeland Security funding.

What this means, in principle, is that any police agency that receives a dime of federal Homeland Security money is effectively an appendage of the Department of Homeland Security (or, to use the appropriate German expression, the Heimatsicherheitsdienst).

This is obviously true of municipal police departments, which are innately illegitimate paramilitary bodies in no way accountable to the public they supposedly serve. We’re invited to believe that local elected sheriffs are different – at least where the incipient gun grab is concerned. 

The ranks of the refuseniks will continue to expand, and they will feed gun owners a steady diet of bold talk about their willingness to interpose on behalf of their constituents if the Feds come for their guns. Some of them may be sincerely committed to do so. But until they stop actively collaborating in existing federal abuses, why should we assume they would be willing to take the side of the public against the Feds when the Regime decides to come for our guns?

By Way of Illustration... 

... we see the following act of felonious assault and kidnapping by Citrus County, Florida Deputy Sheriff Andy Cox, who threatens to murder innocent, law-abiding gun owner. It took less than two seconds for this this cretinous, foul-mouthed tax-feeder to drop the pose of superficial geniality. His first instinct, on learning that this harmless man was armed, was to threaten to murder him, because he had been indoctrinated in the belief that Mundanes simply cannot be permitted to bear arms.

When assessing the credibility of "constitutional sheriffs" as protectors of the right to bear arms, bear in mind that sheriffs are politicians and administrators; the patrol officers in their departments are people like Andy Cox.

Oregon Sheriff & Others Won't Enforce Unconstitutional Gun Laws

 

An Oregon sheriff says he will not enforce any federal regulation that President Barack Obama lays out in his package of gun control proposals Wednesday.

Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller joins several other public officials across the nation who have decided to square off with the White House even before it outlines what its plans are for expanded measures.

Mueller sent a letter to Vice President Joe Biden this week saying he won't enforce any federal regulation "offending the constitutional rights of my citizens." He won't permit federal officers to come to his county to enforce such laws either, he said.

Mueller's defiant stand exploded into a groundswell of support. His letter -- posted on the department's Facebook page -- earned more than 59,000 likes and shares -- and was growing by the minute.

Over the weekend, Sheriff Denny Peyman of Jackson County, Kentucky, said that he too would disobey any directive from the administration. He told residents in a town hall meeting that the sheriff has more power than the federal government.

"They need to go back and study that. We are a commonwealth. I can ask federal people to leave, they have to leave. I can ask state people to leave, they have to leave," he said.

But Wednesday on CNN, Peyman said he would enforce laws approved by Congress.

"If it goes through Congress, if it becomes law, if it goes that way, yeah, I'd enforce the law," he said.

 

Obama considers executive action on guns

In Texas, a lawmaker said this week that he will introduce legislation that would make it illegal to enforce a federal gun ban.

"At some point there needs to be a showdown between the states and the federal government over the Supremacy Clause," Republican Rep. Steve Toth told WOAI 1200-AM. "It is our responsibility to push back when those laws are infringed by King Obama."

New York passes first gun control bill since Newtown

Local officials don't get to make that call, CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin said.

"A sheriff does not get to decide whether laws are constitutional," he said. "Unless a court invalidates a law, he's obligated to enforce it."

In any event, local police wouldn't be responsible for enforcing federal gun laws, CNN Legal Analyst Paul Callan said.

"The FBI will be enforcing them, treasury agents will enforce them. It won't be local police who would be out making sure federal gun regulations are enforced," he said.

Obama's proposals Wednesday largely draw on the work of a task force chaired by Biden.

An official familiar with the process said the president's proposal will include universal background checks and bans on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.

Other recommendations by Biden's panel include tougher enforcement of existing laws, legislators briefed by the vice president said Tuesday.

Support surprises sheriff

In Linn County, the support for Mueller's letter caught the sheriff's office by surprise.

"Sheriff Tim Mueller is humbled and amazed at the support people near and far have expressed to his letter. Thank you!" said a post on the department's Facebook page.

A post by Jill Leiser Crowley of Eugene expressed the opinions of many.

Senator: Obama acting like a 'king'

"Thank you for standing up for our Constitutional Rights!!!" it said. "You are doing the right thing for the people of Linn County - I can only hope other counties will follow!!!"

But Karin Hunt, another Oregonian, questioned the sheriff's stance.

"I would expect (an) officer to enforce the laws of Oregon and the U.S.A. whether he agrees with the law or not," she said. "That's taking the law into your own hands."

The White House knows it can expect a fight.

"Part of the challenge we confront is that even the slightest hint of some sensible, responsible legislation in this area fans this notion that somehow, 'Here it comes, everybody's guns are going to be taken away,' " Obama said Monday.

Getting any legislation passed may prove to be difficult.

The influential National Rifle Association, among other gun rights groups, has vowed to fight tooth and nail against any new gun restrictions -- like an assault weapons ban, which the group's president, David Keene, predicted Sunday wouldn't make it through Congress.

Polls support change

Although some officials have come out against new gun control laws, Americans as a whole are looking for some sort of change after the Newtown, Connecticut, shootings last month that took the lives of 20 grade school children and seven adults.

By a 51%-45% margin, Americans questioned in a new Pew Research Center poll said it was more important to control gun ownership than to protect gun rights.

And by a 52%-35% margin, a new ABC News/Washington Post survey indicates the public says it is more likely to support some forms of gun control after last month's massacre. However, the polls showed continuing divisions along political and gender lines.

Still, one Oregon resident warned against passing laws that would conflict with the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms.

"Constitutional changes must be made properly with Congressional and judicial approval, and by a majority of the citizens of the USA, not by the order of a tyrant in Washington D.C.!!!" said Rick Carter of Pendleton.

 "I stand with the brave Sheriff!"

The battle lines could not be clearer.

10 California Sheriffs Take Their Stand

Tehama County Sheriff Dave Hencratt will host a panel of 10 Constitutional sheriffs on June 23rd in Red Bluff, CA. fairgrounds.

Panel of 10 rural sheriffs will speak on hot issues

www.SupportRuralAmerica.com

Red Bluff, CA – Ten Northern California Sheriffs will hold a public meeting on Saturday, June 23rd speaking on the Constitution and local issues plaguing rural counties. Tehama County Sheriff Dave Hencratt will serve as host in this fourth Support Rural America Sheriffs’ Event held in 2012.

Nine sheriffs from neighboring counties are joining Sheriff Hencratt in the biggest panel yet of county sheriffs. Those attending are: Siskiyou Sheriff Jon Lopey, Del Norte Sheriff Dean Wilson, Plumas Sheriff Greg Hagwood, Trinity Sheriff Bruce Haney, Modoc Sheriff Mike Poindexter, Mendocino Sheriff Tom Allman, Glenn Sheriff Larry Jones, Humboldt Sheriff Mike Downey and Shasta Sheriff Tom Bosenko.

In these difficult economic times, public safety has become a huge issue for county sheriffs; and these men have found other issues in common, especially the shut-down of public lands to the public.

Sheriff Hencratt invites the public to attend and share in this Town Hall-type meeting.

Admission is free. It will be held in Red Bluff at the Tehama County Fairgrounds. Doors open at noon with the meeting beginning at 1:30 p.m.

The event is sponsored by Tehama County Patriots and Support Rural America.com.

For more information, contact Patsy Mohler at 530-527-6915, Erin Ryan at 530-515-7135 or Liz Bowen at 530-457-3515; or go to www.SupportRuralAmerica.com on the internet.

Sheriff Richard Mack, NULLIFY NDAA NOW!

On January 30-31, 2012 over 100 county sheriffs and peace officers, from over 30 states, united to uphold their oaths of office, protect citizen liberty, and stop state and federal tyranny. Inspired and led by the example of former Graham County Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, the meeting, which was held in Las Vegas, was funded by the generous donations of thousands of Americans from all fifty states, as well as the support of freedom loving sponsors.

The agenda included training on the Bill of Rights, Interposition, Nullification and the importance of Property Rights versus Privileges. Many sheriffs, a police chief and even a county commissioner shared their experiences, challenges and actions taken to uphold their oaths of office, directly with the sheriffs in attendance.

The videos of these presentations are shared here on the County Sheriff Project YouTube channel. We hope that you will share these videos with your own county sheriff and all the oath takers in your county. To read the meeting agenda, see the event sponsors, learn more and show your own support for helping back more constitutional county sheriffs, visit
County Sheriff Project

Former Graham County Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack Sheriff Mack closes out the January 31st public event in Las Vegas, Nevada. He explains how a county commissioner and a county sheriff are nullifying the NDAA and indefinite detention through resolution and action.

Mack extols the commitment that the over 100 sheriffs have to uphold their oaths of office and that the purpose of this meeting was to show other sheriffs how they are already protecting the liberties of their people every day. He ends with an announcement of his candidacy for US Congress.

140 Sheriffs Meet To Reclaim America

Something extraordinary and historic took place mere days ago in Las Vegas, Nevada.

For three days, from January 29 and 31, 2012, in the Tuscany Hotel & Casino, more than a hundred county sheriffs from across the United States of America met in a first annual Constitutional Sheriffs Convention.

This is what Wikipedia says about U.S. sheriffs:

“In the United States, a sheriff is a county official and is typically the top law enforcement officer of a county. Historically, the sheriff was also commander of the militia in that county. Distinctive to law enforcement in the United States, sheriffs are usually elected. The political election of a person to serve as a police leader is an almost uniquely American tradition.”

The first Constitutional Sheriffs Convention is the brainchild of the County Sheriff Project of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA). Here’s a video describing the CSPOA:

The convention’s objective is two-fold:

To increase the understanding and awareness for all sheriffs and peace officers regarding the true power of our constitutional authority and duty to serve and protect the people for whom we work;
To unite in a concerted effort to uphold and defend the United States Constitution.

Given the importance of the convention, it is curious to say the least that the media have chosen to totally ignore it. Curious, too, is the fact that I scoured the Internet yesterday but could find scant news on the convention, much less a report — not even on the website of the County Sheriff Project.

But I did find an audio of a 1.5 hr Revolution Radio broadcast on the convention, interviewing several sheriffs who attended the conference, as well as other attendees, mainly Stewart Rhodes, founder of Oath Keepers. To listen to the audio, click here.

I listened to all 93 minutes of the Revolution Radio broadcast. Here are my notes and summary:

Is DHS Terrorizing Americans?

As reported recently, heavily armed agents of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stormed a Leesburg, Florida Social Security office. This supposed drill was unannounced, and was understandably frightening to the local visitors to that office.

The armed DHS thugs arrived in swat team fashion, surrounding the building with their blue and white SUVs, and posting at the door of the Social Security building a guard with a semi-automatic weapon. Some began randomly checking the identification of locals, while others with drug sniffing dogs rifled through the rest of the building. One can understand their caution and hard-handed behavior due to the extreme risk posed to our country by Florida retirees.

There was obviously no cause to accost any of these innocent citizens, but when in this day and age, given the police state we now live in, do the feds care about cause? Apparently, the governor, the attorney general, and all the state police forces were absent, probably hiding behind their desks until the feds left after their fascist style raid!

The DHS had the audacity to call this assault "Operation Shield." This sounds more like a name of a war operation in the Middle East than a raid on the elderly. This was done under the guise of a surprise drill with a mission to detect the "presence of unauthorized persons and potentially disruptive or dangerous activities." None of these existed of course, but why should that matter to the DHS, the most abominable agency of the federal government. The real mission of the DHS is to intimidate and terrorize innocent people so as to habituate and control them. It will be necessary to break down the resistance of the citizenry, so that the people will not take aggressive action against the state when civil unrest becomes the norm, and Martial Law is implemented. Obviously the government plan is working.

These DHS "checkpoints" are becoming far too common. What began just recently in Tennessee as a test has now spread to many other parts of this country. This was expected by those of us who understand the nature of the federal government’s aggression against freedom, but the speed at which it is progressing is dangerous. These checkpoints will continue to increase in number, and will continue to expand in area. A pattern is already obvious, and allowing this invasion of our rights to go unanswered is a fool's game.

The remedy lies with individuals, and with individual states. We as sovereign individuals have to be prepared to resist the fascist advances of the federal government, and its preferred agency of force, the Department of Homeland Security. Most still cringe at the thought of Nazi or Stalinist enforcers who detained people and demanded to see their papers, but what difference is there between those enforcers of old and the DHS? When a heavily armed DHS or TSA thug dressed in combat gear and armor forces you to submit to his orders, and without any provocation, what else can that be called but tyranny? Refusing to acquiesce to this assault on our liberty should be the first step taken.

The individual states also have an obligation to protect their residents from federal invasions and bad laws, and should take immediate action to stop the feds from terrorizing citizens with these criminal raids. When DHS thugs come into any state to set up these fascist checkpoints, the sheriff's office, and all other state police forces, by order of the governor or states attorney general, should immediately instruct them to leave. If they do not obey, then they should be arrested and jailed.

This may sound extreme to some, but in reality, this is the only proper course. There are many more of us than there are of them. There is no reason for the states to bow down to the federal government or any of its agencies, or allow them to run roughshod over us. The states should not allow this Stalinist behavior by the DHS to continue. The use of nullification by individual states and their police forces is necessary, and would be enough to squelch any threat by the feds!

If in fact, this avenue were taken, the feds would have but two choices. They could either leave the state immediately as ordered, or they could go to war against that state. Would they dare risk the latter? I think not, as that would turn the entire country against the federal government, and without the implied consent of the people, the central government would be forced to stand down.

This strategy would simply be an act of actionable nullification by the states against the feds. Drafting a worthless resolution will not get the job done, but a real nullification with teeth would keep the feds at bay.

Sheriff Richard Mack Supports National Constitutional Sheriff's Convention To Reclaim America

An Open Message To Police & Military

Are Americans In Line For Gitmo?

Ambiguous but alarming new wording tucked into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and just passed by the Senate is reminiscent of the “extraordinary measures” introduced by the Nazis after they took power in 1933.

And the relative lack of reaction so far calls to mind the oddly calm indifference with which most Germans watched the erosion of the rights that had been guaranteed by their own constitution. As one German writer observed, “With sheepish submissiveness we watched it unfold, as if from a box at the theater.”

The writer was Sebastian Haffner (real name Raimund Pretzel), a young German lawyer worried at what he saw in 1933 in Berlin but helpless to stop it since, as he put it, the German people “collectively and limply collapsed, yielded, and capitulated.”

“The result of this millionfold nervous breakdown,” wrote Haffner at the time, “is the unified nation, ready for anything, that is today the nightmare of the rest of the world.” Not a happy analogy.

The Senate bill, in effect, revokes an 1878 law known as the Posse Comitatus Act, which banned the Army from domestic law enforcement after the military had been used — and often abused — in that role during Reconstruction. Ever since then, that law has been taken very seriously — until now. Military officers have had their careers brought to an abrupt halt by involving federal military assets in purely civilian criminal matters.

County Sheriff Project

What would you do if you knew you had just one chance to save your family and country from complete and utter destruction? What would you do if you knew there was a lawful and peaceful way to restore the Constitution and its Bill of Rights as the supreme law of the land?


As a former peace officer and county sheriff, if I were to take the stand in court right this minute, and be sworn to tell the truth, I would, without any hesitation or ambiguity, testify to you and every American, that there is a solution, that there is in fact a way to secure liberty, protect ourselves and our families, and once again live in peace and freedom.


The solution is in your hands, it is within your own backyard, it is right in your own county. The solution is state sovereignty and each county acting in accordance with the principles established in the 10th Amendment. It's you working with your county sheriff and locally elected officials to stand up for the Bill of Rights and to stand against the out of control federal government and it agencies.

The bottom line answer is your county sheriff. Ultimately, he is the one who will decide what is and what is not enforced in your county. He has the authority and is oath bound duty to interpose himself on your behalf to protect you from all enemies, both foreign and domestic. He is the people's protector.


But the county sheriffs cannot do this alone. They need training, education, and support. To this end, I have helped form the CSPOA or the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officer Association. And, one of our first projects is national convention of up to 200 county sheriffs, targeted to convene in January 2012 in Las Vegas, Nevada. We can free America now, one county at a time, with the leadership of one county sheriff at a time.

Sheriff Richard Mack On #S1867

Oregon Sheriff Stands Against Feds & Wants All Sheriffs To Do So

“The Constitution is clear on who has police and legislative powers. Those executive orders are not law,” said Gilbertson.

And while FLPMA is a congressionally passed statute, it delegates undue powers to the agencies. “Congress cannot give an agency the ability to write rules and regulations and enforce them as if they were law,” he said. “Congress has to do that. These agencies write their own rules and regulations as they go along and enforce these as law.”

“The big issue, as I see it,” he continued, “is that all these things combine. You have DEQ, EPA, all these federal entities. And as all these federal agencies evolved over the years, there’s been mission creep. They decided, well, we need to fix this; this gives us more powers, and so forth, so we’ll just write down more rules and regulations. They were allowed to get away with it for whatever reason, and now they enforce those as laws. But it’s clearly stated that that can’t be done -- I spelled that out in my document,” he said.

Moreover, “Forest reserves were not federal enclaves subject to the doctrine of exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the United States. Local peace officers were to exercise civil and criminal process over these lands. Forest Service rangers were not law enforcement officers unless designated as such by state authority.”

The federal government sees it otherwise, so in addition to expanding claims for general regulatory power agencies like the Forest Service are attempting to extend the reach of law enforcement authority – a matter that adds to Gilbertson’s concerns.

“The U.S. Forest Service and BLM are really stepping outside their authority in that the Constitution does not give them that,” he observed. “The Tenth Amendment clearly reserves police rights to the states.”

Law Enforcement Power Grab

Sheriffs in other counties have taken note of this development. In his report Gilbertson refers to a one-page position paper by the Western States Sheriffs’ Association that concurs with his observations, and in fact grew from his earlier one. He writes, quoting from the WSSA statement:

Constitutional Sheriffs Support Rural America

These 8 sheriffs have come together in Siskiyou County in defense of rural America. They assert their oath to defend the people from all enemies foreign and domestic. Dam removal is but one of the federal and state actions that can be described as regulatory terrorism. The 10th Amendment gives the county sheriff the power to be the people’s last line of defense. These are the heroes for all freedom-loving citizens and it’s all starting right here in rural America. Listen to their passion for the people under siege in their counties and ask yourself if you can stay out of this fight one day longer. They are coming for you next!

Don't miss the great videos!

Deputy With A Heart

A sheriff's deputy in Michigan's Thumb area rescued a deer after the animal was hit and apparently too shocked to move off the road.

The incident was captured on the dashboard camera of Huron County Deputy Ryan Swartz.

The video shows Swartz picking up the doe Friday night as it stood on all fours on a two-lane road in Dwight Township, not far from the tip of the Thumb. The officer first thought it was a decoy.

NOTE: A man with a kind heart.

Sheriff's Rise Up Against The Feds

As more people became dissatisfied with federal government controls and land grabs, it was inevitable that local law enforcement would eventually see the bigger picture. At the northern California fairgrounds of Yreka last month, seven California sheriffs and another from Oregon gathered with a large group of citizens to say that they are finally going to do something about it.

“A giant has been awakened,” said Plumas County, Calif. Sheriff Greg Hagwood, “and they didn’t count on that,” speaking of the federal bureaucracy.

With exposure of the Emergency Management Center in San Luis Obispo a few decades ago, California began to offer the rest of the nation some evidence of the psychological conditioning aimed from the federal level at state, county and city law enforcement.

Dean Wilson, sheriff of Del Norte County (Sacramento), is a great example of this great awakening. He received the loudest and longest applause for his candor in confessing past faults after apologizing for not understanding the central government assault and land grab being committed against the people and what he should have been doing about it. Only in the past year has he done a turnaround and begun to behave as a county sheriff instead of an extension of federal law enforcement.

“I had spent a good part of my life enforcing the penal code, but not understanding my oath of office,” he told the audience. “I was ignorant and naïve, but now I know of the assault against our people by the federal government.”

Host sheriff John Lopey of Siskiyou County, speaking about the federal environmental intervention, said: “I have told federal and state officials over and over that, yes, we want to preserve the environment, but you care more about the fish, frogs, trees and birds than you do about the human race. When will you start to balance your decisions to the needs of the people?” Later he told the audience, “We are right now in a fight for our survival.”

Glenn Palmer, sheriff of Grant County, Oregon, said, “If an elected official has not taken an oath of office, he does not belong in office.”

AFP readers are familiar with the work of former Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack, who has spent the latter half of his life teaching sheriffs that they are the top law enforcement officers in their counties despite continuing federal intervention attempts. The ears that were deaf for so long may finally be starting to hear.

“It’s becoming a national movement now,” Mack told AFP, citing Immigration and Naturalization Service failure at the Mexican borders, the phony drug war, plus IRS and other unconstitutional intervention within these states.

His plans to take this movement national will be launched at a January meeting, where he anticipates 200 sheriffs will be in attendance.

“The county sheriff is the last line of defense guarding our people’s liberty,” he said.

Retired USAF Col. Richard Niemela of Reston, Va. has been exposing the federal monster for years.

NOTE: Our freedom or tyranny in American will come from a uniform. There are more than 3,000 US Sheriff departments with an average of 15 deputies. They can reclaim America if they wake up as they ethical sheriffs have. As for the other law enforcement groups, it would require basic intellect which may be lacking for comprehension. Time will tell.

Will US Military Be Used To Crush Us?

'The Alternative Futures Symposium in Chantilly, Va. was all part of the U.S. Army’s Unified Quest 2012 exercise, the latest in a series of annual war games that in recent years has focused on America’s response to a global financial meltdown in which average citizens took to the streets en masse.

In November 2010, CNBC’s Eamon Javers had this to say about last year’s exercise: “Ever since the crash of 2008, the defense-intelligence establishment has been paying a lot of attention to global markets and how they can serve as a threat to U.S. national security interests.”

Javers went on to report: “The Army is having a very interesting yearlong exercise called Unified Quest 2011.'

NOTE: And they will do it with the same gusto and pleasure that attracts deviant personalities. The only hope for America is the 3,000+ Sheriff's offices.

#Sheriff Richard Mack Forms Group Of Constitutional Sheriffs~No Sheriff Left Behind

What would you do if you knew you had just one chance to save your family and country from complete and utter destruction? What would you do if you knew there was a lawful and peaceful way to restore the Constitution and its Bill of Rights as the supreme law of the land?

Did you know that the Sheriff is the highest constitutional executive authority in the county? Very few people realize that the Sheriff has the legitimate authority to prevent federal agents from entering the county - or the power to throw them out once they are there.

We can quickly change things for the better in America as soon as we have Sheriffs that understand their oath of office, and the total extent of the power they have. I would like to invite 200 Sheriffs from across the country to join me Las Vegas in January of 2012 to give them the training they need to protect your life, liberty, and property.

What I want you to do is to help me raise $200,000 that will be used for the travel and lodging expenses for the first 200 Sheriffs in a continuing program we call "No Sheriff Left Behind". I am willing to do the training, and we have many Sheriffs who have already expressed an interest in attending. All we need now is for you to donate generously to start the ball rolling. Together - with our constitutionally elected Sheriffs - we can restore peace and freedom to the United States, even before the 2012 elections.

Won't you help? To make this happen, this project needs your financial support. Our founders pledged their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to this holy cause. What are you willing to do to restore our republic? We are not asking for your fortunes, but merely that you do what you can.

With your help, this could be one of the most important meetings since the Founders signed the Constitution.

NOTE: Our Freedom or tyranny will come to us in a uniform.

Sheriff Jon Lopey Stands For Constitution

Lopey is the elected sheriff of Siskiyou County. This clip is part of a Yreka CA meeting on October 22, 2011 where eight elected county sheriffs report to citizens their feelings and solutions to the impending federal government threat on their property rights.

NOTE: If you're concerned about what some Sheriffs are doing, this video showing 8 Northern California Sheriffs (1 from Southern Oregon) explains their intention to keep the Federales in line.