Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State’s Gun Laws

[NYcarbineer]

By Nicole Flatow

For months, local sheriffs have been objecting to federal efforts to stem gun violence in the wake of the Newtown massacre, claiming they violate “states’ rights.” Now, with a package of gun violence prevention measures awaiting the governor’s signature in a state that has seen some of the most deadly and high-profile mass shootings, several Colorado county sheriffs are threatening not to enforce their own state’s measures to expand criminal background checks and limit ammunition magazines if they are signed into law. The Greeley Tribune reports:

More: Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State's Gun Laws

Cooke won't enforce new state gun laws | GreeleyTribune.com

Do you wish for law enforcement to not use common sense and reasoning in the enforcement of laws? You must realize there are many laws on the books that are never enforced. Many of which I am sure you would be very angry if enforced on you.

For arguments sake what if a law, which many feel this one is, violated the constitution? What if a state law was voted in by Colorado that said law enforcement needed no warrant to search ones home if a neighbor called in saying they thought there was drugs in that home?

Any sheriff with common sense wouldn't be parading around telling everybody he isn't going to enforce some particular law; if he wanted to cut people slack on a law then he would have the common sense to do it with discretion.

 

[Katzndogz]

No reason to enforce those laws

What aspect of the background check would have stopped that shooting ? And how would a 15 round magazine helped ?

You can't stigmatize the mentally ill.

 

[bornright]

By Nicole Flatow

For months, local sheriffs have been objecting to federal efforts to stem gun violence in the wake of the Newtown massacre, claiming they violate “states’ rights.” Now, with a package of gun violence prevention measures awaiting the governor’s signature in a state that has seen some of the most deadly and high-profile mass shootings, several Colorado county sheriffs are threatening not to enforce their own state’s measures to expand criminal background checks and limit ammunition magazines if they are signed into law. The Greeley Tribune reports:

More: Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State's Gun Laws

Cooke won't enforce new state gun laws | GreeleyTribune.com

Do you wish for law enforcement to not use common sense and reasoning in the enforcement of laws? You must realize there are many laws on the books that are never enforced. Many of which I am sure you would be very angry if enforced on you.

For arguments sake what if a law, which many feel this one is, violated the constitution? What if a state law was voted in by Colorado that said law enforcement needed no warrant to search ones home if a neighbor called in saying they thought there was drugs in that home?

We are not talking about common sense here. These sheriffs are driven by ideology. Some of them are members of militias. The Timothy McVeigh mentality.

This country is going off the rails. Ever since Barack Obama was elected we have witnessed nothing short of domestic terrorism from the right. A bunch of dogmatic driven Fox propaganda filled know nothings.

Please tell me which of these sheriffs are members of some odd militia group. I hope you do not consider the U S military as one as I would have to concede that many of them did serve in the American military.

I do agree however that this country has been going off the rails ever since Obama was elected. I have not seen any domestic terrorism from the right but maybe you could give me a few examples.

 

[martybegan]

By Nicole Flatow

For months, local sheriffs have been objecting to federal efforts to stem gun violence in the wake of the Newtown massacre, claiming they violate “states’ rights.” Now, with a package of gun violence prevention measures awaiting the governor’s signature in a state that has seen some of the most deadly and high-profile mass shootings, several Colorado county sheriffs are threatening not to enforce their own state’s measures to expand criminal background checks and limit ammunition magazines if they are signed into law. The Greeley Tribune reports:

More: Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State's Gun Laws

Cooke won't enforce new state gun laws | GreeleyTribune.com

Do you wish for law enforcement to not use common sense and reasoning in the enforcement of laws? You must realize there are many laws on the books that are never enforced. Many of which I am sure you would be very angry if enforced on you.

For arguments sake what if a law, which many feel this one is, violated the constitution? What if a state law was voted in by Colorado that said law enforcement needed no warrant to search ones home if a neighbor called in saying they thought there was drugs in that home?

Any sheriff with common sense wouldn't be parading around telling everybody he isn't going to enforce some particular law; if he wanted to cut people slack on a law then he would have the common sense to do it with discretion.

Actually this forces the issue out in the open, and places them against the heads of most major city police chiefs, who often think only police officers (and retired police officers, and government officals, and thier friends) should have 2nd amendment rights, and the rest of us should wait for the police to show up to document and tag our corpses.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is little more than politics by the sheriffs, who are, let's remember, also politicians. County by county in a state like Colorado, Republicans tend to dominate. Some anti-gun bluster is good political pandering.

 

[JQPublic1]

the sheriff is the law of the land

The law is the law of the land. If the sheriff isn't going to enforce it then he needs to go.

It might be the duty of the sheriff to obey the law of the land but not necessarily to enforce it. Further , loyalty to the people who elected him probably trumps any loyalty 2 state or federal level jurisdictions. , after all, his constituents are his eployers'not the state or federal governments.

I do have a problem with the sheriffs deciding what is constitutional or not constitutional, though! They are enforcers of county statutes and serve as an arm of the county attorney or chief county magistrate. They are not legislators

 

[bornright]

Do you wish for law enforcement to not use common sense and reasoning in the enforcement of laws? You must realize there are many laws on the books that are never enforced. Many of which I am sure you would be very angry if enforced on you.

For arguments sake what if a law, which many feel this one is, violated the constitution? What if a state law was voted in by Colorado that said law enforcement needed no warrant to search ones home if a neighbor called in saying they thought there was drugs in that home?

Any sheriff with common sense wouldn't be parading around telling everybody he isn't going to enforce some particular law; if he wanted to cut people slack on a law then he would have the common sense to do it with discretion.

Actually this forces the issue out in the open, and places them against the heads of most major city police chiefs, who often think only police officers (and retired police officers, and government officals, and thier friends) should have 2nd amendment rights, and the rest of us should wait for the police to show up to document and tag our corpses.

It is rare to find a police chief against the second amendment but I agree there are a few in some of the major cities.

 

[bornright]

It just doesnt make sense to violate one law when you enforce another.

 

[Katzndogz]

Since it is impossible to prove a negative no one will ever be able to prove that any LEO is deliberately not enforcing a law that democrats imposed.

 

[Bfgrn]

Do you wish for law enforcement to not use common sense and reasoning in the enforcement of laws? You must realize there are many laws on the books that are never enforced. Many of which I am sure you would be very angry if enforced on you.

For arguments sake what if a law, which many feel this one is, violated the constitution? What if a state law was voted in by Colorado that said law enforcement needed no warrant to search ones home if a neighbor called in saying they thought there was drugs in that home?

We are not talking about common sense here. These sheriffs are driven by ideology. Some of them are members of militias. The Timothy McVeigh mentality.

This country is going off the rails. Ever since Barack Obama was elected we have witnessed nothing short of domestic terrorism from the right. A bunch of dogmatic driven Fox propaganda filled know nothings.

And gun grabbers are driven by fear of their fellow law abiding citizens, and ignorance of the fact that criminals will continue to ignore the law, regardless of how many new ones you pass.

I have no problem with law abiding citizens owning weapons to protect themselves, their family and their property. ALL citizens should be behind laws that prevent criminals from buying guns in any setting other than a dark alley. And 92% of Americans support background checks on ALL gun sales. 85% of people who either are or live with NRA members support background checks. But you right wingers are being duped by the NRA who is a front group for gun manufacturers and who spreads massive FEAR.

As citizens, we can't stop a criminal from buying an illegal firearm from the trunk of another criminal in some dark alley.

But, that's where the criminal should be forced to buy a gun. In a totally illegal setting, with all the inherent dangers that come with it. BUT, our current laws sanction criminals being able to walk into a gun show, receive expert advice, discounts, then buy whatever weapon(s) they desire without a background check or having to pay black market prices or risk the dangers of buying a weapon from another criminal in a dark alley.

 

[Spoonman]

By Nicole Flatow

For months, local sheriffs have been objecting to federal efforts to stem gun violence in the wake of the Newtown massacre, claiming they violate “states’ rights.” Now, with a package of gun violence prevention measures awaiting the governor’s signature in a state that has seen some of the most deadly and high-profile mass shootings, several Colorado county sheriffs are threatening not to enforce their own state’s measures to expand criminal background checks and limit ammunition magazines if they are signed into law. The Greeley Tribune reports:

More: Colorado Sheriffs Threaten Not To Enforce Their Own State's Gun Laws

Cooke won't enforce new state gun laws | GreeleyTribune.com

excellent, good for him

 

[OKTexas]

Maybe these maverick sheriffs are indicative of why "current" gun laws aren't being properly enforced - let alone "new" gun laws. Sheriffs enforce laws - they don't make them. Sheriffs don't have the legal right to pick and choose which laws they enforce.

Really, why should they be any different than your dear leader? Federal gun prosecutions are down about 40% and someone who falsifies a background check has a less than 1% chance of being prosecuted. You can't complain about selective enforcement on one end and not the other. After all a sheriffs department have to prioritize how they use their resources also.

We're only talking about "one end" in this thread - the sheriff end. If you wish to address the "other end" - start a thread on it.

Guess you miss the part I put in bold. Carry on.

 

[OKTexas]

First of all, what is immoral about requiring background checks on the purchase of firearms,

done for the purpose of keeping convicted felons and other ineligible persons from legally acquiring guns?

Secondly, should an abortion doctor who thinks a state abortion law is contrary to Roe v. Wade and thus unconsitutional be able to continue to perform abortions unimpeded by the law?

Thirdly, if a sheriff has moral objections to performing the primary duty of his job, which is law enforcement, then he should seek another profession.

No one ever said they should not suffer consequences for thier actions. It is now up to the state level to decide if it will attempt to punish said Sherrif's for thier defiance, if and when they choose to implement it. At that point the state has to make a choice, back off or prosecute locally elected sherriffs for defiance of a law the sherriffs see as unconsitutional. In any event it will end up in the courts.


Most of the opposition is about banning certain guns for cosmetic purposes, and the usual "magazine size restriction" bullshit.

There is a difference between a sherriff who will not try to apprehend murders rapists and thieves, and someone who doesnt want to arrest someone for owning a piece of stamped metal that holds more than 15 rounds of ammunition.

I'm sure the Colorado state police can pick up the slack for some sheriff who'd rather sit on his ass all day than enforce the law.

Are you aware that Weld County, CO is twice the size of Rhode Island?

 

[bucs90]

Thanks for sharing this, it shows the trend thats coming

Connie Weirick

You're welcome. And yes it is the trend that's coming from radical extremists who selectively enforce and obey only those laws they agree with - yet they preach the Constitution.

All sheriffs and police officers- from the LA County Sheriff........all the way down to the Town of Podunk patrol officer......have descretion. Meaning they are allowed, but not obligated, to enforce laws.

That is a crucial part of our checks and balances. Its why when a cop sees someone going 2mph over the limit, or forgetting to use a turn signal, they can simply ignore that violation. Its why when they sometimes catch a man who is unemployed trying to shoplift a pack of lunch meat and some bread to feed his kids......they have a choice: Arrest and fine him; Let him go, seeing as his kids are gonna go hungry either way, why make it even harder. Its why when they catch someone with a tiny 2 grams of weed, they can say "Flush it dude" rather than lock 'em up.

That fact is why Im confident our country will be fine. Our cops and sheriffs dont have much tolerance for bullshit laws. And they have the choice to tell politicians "Fuck off, that law is stupid."

 

[Mustang]

OH BOY! Another unbiased piece of crap.

Glad to see there are some Oath Keepers with some backbone.

The Oath Keepers? You mean that supposedly 'non partisan' organization which was formed in March 2009, barely a few short weeks after President Obama was sworn in as president?

 

[OKTexas]

OH BOY! Another unbiased piece of crap.

Glad to see there are some Oath Keepers with some backbone.

The Oath Keepers? You mean that supposedly 'non partisan' organization which was formed in March 2009, barely a few short weeks after President Obama was sworn in as president?

Yep, that's the one, except you failed to say that it was inspired primarily by the Patriot Act and took a while to get its organizational legs. The Constitutional Sheriffs Associations is an off shoot that is even newer that the original 2009 founding.

 

[Amelia]

The legislators who passed these new gun laws were duly elected by the citizens of Colorado. Therefore, if the Governor signs them into law, any sheriff who refuses to enforce the new laws should be arrested and tried accordingly. I'm sure the Colorado Constitution doesn't allow a sheriff to pick and choose which laws to enforce.

How about Obama? Should he be arrested and tried for not enforcing the laws passed by the duly elected members of Congress?

Does the U.S. Constitution allow the President to pick and choose which laws to enforce?

 

[Amelia]

Maybe these maverick sheriffs are indicative of why "current" gun laws aren't being properly enforced - let alone "new" gun laws. Sheriffs enforce laws - they don't make them. Sheriffs don't have the legal right to pick and choose which laws they enforce.

If Obama can pick and choose which laws he's going to enforce, then why not a local sheriff?

Bingo.

 

[Amelia]

the sheriff is the law of the land

The law is the law of the land. If the sheriff isn't going to enforce it then he needs to go.

Then bye bye to Obama.

 

[bucs90]

OH BOY! Another unbiased piece of crap.

Glad to see there are some Oath Keepers with some backbone.

The Oath Keepers? You mean that supposedly 'non partisan' organization which was formed in March 2009, barely a few short weeks after President Obama was sworn in as president?

Yep, that's the one, except you failed to say that it was inspired primarily by the Patriot Act and took a while to get its organizational legs. The Constitutional Sheriffs Associations is an off shoot that is even newer that the original 2009 founding.

Yep. Oath Keepers is a wonderful group. I support them 100%. Even though I told the GOP to fuck off, I still support our military and police, sometimes to the point of being obnoxious about it (especially cops, since they get so little public support).

But yes, Oath Keepers is a wonderful group. People would be shocked to know how many cops share those same ideals, they just dont make any effort to show it publicly. They truly are 'silent heroes' at times.

And the two bedrocks of our nation are the military and police, in my opinion. The fact that a law is nothing but ink on paper unless the military or police enforce it provides us a lot of wiggle room between liberty and tyranny.

Cops cant be court martialed. They are different than the military in that regard. They can pick and choose which laws to enforce. Now, if they see a murder, and dont arrest the guy, well, that cops career is gonna be over immediately when he is fired. But he can not be criminally charged for not enforcing it so long as he didnt partake or aid in the crime.

So, when stupid politicians pass stupid or immoral laws, the cops can tell the govt body to fuck off, and just refuse to enforce it. The city I live in passed a smoking ordinance, which bans smoking in all buildings other than private homes. Its been on the books for 5 years, and not a single ticket has ever been written for it. Most people abide by it. A few dont. I've seen some light up in bars, and no one says a word about it. That law is just ink on paper filed in some cabinet at City Hall.


So, if the Congress tries to pass a stupid, immoral gun law- the cops just wont enforce it. You'll of course have a small % that will. But in large, most cops will ignore most dumb laws. I cant even estimate how many times I told a person to flush or toss a little weed, say, 5-7 grams or less, because it just wasnt a big deal and not worth charging the guy with it. They were polite to me, had a minor violation, and it hurt no one to just let it slide.