Defensive Carry banner

21 - 40 of 61 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,837 Posts
Insurrection act anyone?
There may come a time everyone you are either an insurrectionist or a collaborator, or at least an appeaser. If the government is violating the Constitution, and it is already, an "act" is pretty meaningless.

Everything the Nazis did was legal under German law at the time. They made sure that was so. Everyone who opposed them was violating the law. We'll get there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,405 Posts
So Newton County has a population of 58,000, wonder just how big of a sheriffs department they actually have. From the looks of their website, it consists of about 32 persons.

I think the feds have more.

Here is a link to the actual act. It seems pretty "all over the place" especially in the language of any past present or future bills. Does that mean that people in their county don't have to apply for tax stamps any longer?

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,687 Posts
I would work very diligently to avoid becoming the test case in federal court.

The good folks of Newton County, Missouri might not complain too much about the first quarter million in legal defense costs for their sheriff, but it probably won't be long until passing the hat around doesn't raise much more cash.

You don't go up for trial in federal court against a team of assistant US attorneys with a good old boy country lawyer handling your defense. You need several top-shelf trial lawyers (along with their staffs) and a parade of expert witnesses (in such a case as this you'd better have recognized constitutional scholars), and none of those folks show up for chump change. Fees won't be measured in hundreds of dollars per hour, you'll be looking at multiples of thousands every week and month for a year or two, even if you don't have to file appeals. Meanwhile, the good sheriff will be under federal indictment, prohibited from possessing firearms or leaving the state until the fat lady sings to the judge's satisfaction.

I sincerely hope the sheriff receives very good legal advice before embarking on enforcement of the new county ordinance. Probably wouldn't hurt to listen to his wife, too. A well-timed vacation, maybe a remote lake with no phones or cellular service, could work nicely.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,030 Posts
There may come a time everyone you are either an insurrectionist or a collaborator, or at least an appeaser. If the government is violating the Constitution, and it is already, an "act" is pretty meaningless.

Everything the Nazis did was legal under German law at the time. They made sure that was so. Everyone who opposed them was violating the law. We'll get there.
The words insurrectionist and collaborator can just easily be replaced with traitor and patriot. The winners write the history books.
Jefferson Davis and the other leadership of the Confederacy thought they were doing the right thing. So did Tim McVeigh. Prisons are full of true believers who are sure various laws and government acts are wrong. Just because they can justify it in their own minds doesn't mean they are right.

What I find amusing is how these politicians are so quick to pass things that only put others in harm's way. Those people that wrote that ordinance are not the ones that would potentially be taking on the feds. I wonder how quick they would be if they would be sharing a cell with anyone foolish enough to play their little games.
 

·
Registered
Rifles and Handguns - Various Types
Joined
·
30 Posts
I would work very diligently to avoid becoming the test case in federal court.

The good folks of Newton County, Missouri might not complain too much about the first quarter million in legal defense costs for their sheriff, but it probably won't be long until passing the hat around doesn't raise much more cash.

You don't go up for trial in federal court against a team of assistant US attorneys with a good old boy country lawyer handling your defense. You need several top-shelf trial lawyers (along with their staffs) and a parade of expert witnesses (in such a case as this you'd better have recognized constitutional scholars), and none of those folks show up for chump change. Fees won't be measured in hundreds of dollars per hour, you'll be looking at multiples of thousands every week and month for a year or two, even if you don't have to file appeals. Meanwhile, the good sheriff will be under federal indictment, prohibited from possessing firearms or leaving the state until the fat lady sings to the judge's satisfaction.

I sincerely hope the sheriff receives very good legal advice before embarking on enforcement of the new county ordinance. Probably wouldn't hurt to listen to his wife, too. A well-timed vacation, maybe a remote lake with no phones or cellular service, could work nicely.
The point of such laws is to demonstrate the feeling of the citizens. They are often effective. Even stupid federal agencies don't enjoy tangling with local political jurisdictions.

There are miles and miles of state and county roads running through indian reservations. There are also many instances where tribes have adopted rules that prohibit local law enforcement from policing those roads. Many LEOs have been arrested by tribal police (especially state and county wildlife agents) and spent time in jail. Governments usually back down and make a deal.

So, such laws do have some impact.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,030 Posts
The point of such laws is to demonstrate the feeling of the citizens. They are often effective. Even stupid federal agencies don't enjoy tangling with local political jurisdictions.

There are miles and miles of state and county roads running through indian reservations. There are also many instances where tribes have adopted rules that prohibit local law enforcement from policing those roads. Many LEOs have been arrested by tribal police (especially state and county wildlife agents) and spent time in jail. Governments usually back down and make a deal.

So, such laws do have some impact.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
Indian reservations are completely different jurisdictions altogether. They are effectively their own states inside other states. "Local" and state law enforcement generally have no authority on a reservation. State issued carry licenses are meaningless on most reservations. Reservations are governed by tribal law and federal laws only.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,646 Posts
I'd hope the Sheriff has better sense then to do that. At most he would likely not allow his deputies to assist federal agents in enforcing federal laws.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,900 Posts
Until such time as county officials have actual power over federal authority, I'm not going to give meaningless decrees much nevermind.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,615 Posts
Discussion Starter #30
Boy, we sure like to come down hard on states and local municipalities who even attempt to fight back against federal actions which infringe on our rights.
At least they are trying to make a statement, make a stand and not roll over and accept whatever comes down from on high in DC.
They should be applauded not ridiculed by people who supposedly support the second amendment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,855 Posts
If you think the totalitarian government that is quickly forming under Biden is going to be taken down by "law abiding" citizens you might as well warm up to having the mind of a slave.
Yes, I will keep voting and keep financing organizations that may turn the tide but, my gut tells me that won't do it.
The only thing we have going right now is push back from some states. This may be technically just a statement but, a lot of states are making statements that we won't roll over.
.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,098 Posts
Without the support of the states, the federal government loses much of its power. Look at the lack of federal marijuana crime enforcement since the states began legalizing it.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
35,900 Posts
Without the support of the states, the federal government loses much of its power. Look at the lack of federal marijuana crime enforcement since the states began legalizing it.
I would put guns and pot at opposite ends of the federal law enforcement spectrum, for sure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,753 Posts
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land period.
True that, and the Supreme Law of the Land (Constitution) ascribes power to the Supreme Court for arbitrating over controversies that arise over said Law. Sometimes it works in one's favor, and other times, not so much. But, the Constitution is not unclear in recognizing that disagreements will occur and equally clear as to who it is that has the responsibility for rendering dispositive judgments over those disagreements - the Supreme Court.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40,098 Posts
I would put guns and pot at opposite ends of the federal law enforcement spectrum, for sure.
Yes, they are, but if more or many states pass such bills of resistance and vowing non-support of federal enforcement, I would bet the federal position on gun enforcement would shift also, concentrating on the most severe violations only, perhaps on federal lands only. No ARs or high cap mags on BLM land and such.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,151 Posts
I know it's easy to say but I'm getting very tired of people poo-pooing every idea or stand just becasue it's hard or may not work. All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

If you're going to simply make excuses every time someone tries to do something just becasue it may not work or they may get in trouble or whatever, then just put your global socialist slave collar on and move along.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,128 Posts
The words insurrectionist and collaborator can just easily be replaced with traitor and patriot. The winners write the history books.
Jefferson Davis and the other leadership of the Confederacy thought they were doing the right thing. So did Tim McVeigh. Prisons are full of true believers who are sure various laws and government acts are wrong. Just because they can justify it in their own minds doesn't mean they are right.

What I find amusing is how these politicians are so quick to pass things that only put others in harm's way. Those people that wrote that ordinance are not the ones that would potentially be taking on the feds. I wonder how quick they would be if they would be sharing a cell with anyone foolish enough to play their little games.
So, were the people who were involved in Operation Valkyrie traitors or patriots?
In the end, it doesn't matter what others think when it comes time to stand judgement for your life. It really (and I'm sure that I will get some argument for this) only matters what you think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,722 Posts
I do believe it is true that a sheriff can arrest federal agents if he has PC. Sheriffs have a lot of power and authority because they are elected by the People, not appointed by some beaurocrap mayor or some other political maggot. I could be wrong with this but I don't think so. And as was already mentioned, the Tenth Amendment clearly states that the powers of the federal government are strictly defined in the Constitution, whereas the powers of the states and of the People are many. The Ninth Amendment also addresses this subject.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,628 Posts
If they go against the USMS, they're likely going to end up dealing with the military.
You need to read the law. In particular the part about Posse Comitatus. You can start here.


I personally witnessed a County Sheriff with a backbone instruct a carload of FBI agents to leave and go somewhere else. It was friendly, but the warning was very, very clear. In the United States, the elected County Sheriff is recognized as the Chief Law Enforcement Officer in the County. It takes a state legislature and a governor to remove an elected Sheriff.
 
21 - 40 of 61 Posts
Top