Nevada sheriff faces recall over enforcing red flag laws

[westwall]

Good, weed 'em out! Didn't they hang the nazis at Nuremberg for just "following orders?"

Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen’s decision to enforce new red flag laws — which allow for temporary confiscation of guns for people a judge deems “at risk” — has spurred a campaign to have him recalled.

Dawn Principe, owner of Sage Hill Arms gun store in Winnemucca and member of the 1,600-member Facebook group behind the recall campaign, said members plan to file a notice of intent with the county on Thursday to recall the sheriff on the grounds he is not “standing up” for their rights. According to the county clerk, the group will have 90 days from when it files to collect 502 signatures and, if successful, proceed with a recall committee.

“They’re taking up a fight against me on something the Legislature has to do, and they think I have the authority not to follow the law,” Allen said in an interview Wednesday with The Nevada Independent. “I do oppose this law. However, it’s my not my job to oppose a law; my job is to enforce the law.”

Humboldt residents will file to recall sheriff after commissioners signed ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ resolution

Yeah, jackboot you go right ahead and enforce unconstitutional laws.

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

Lol, what about his oath to the constitution of the United States? Or do you even care about that?

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

 

[Andylusion]

Good, weed 'em out! Didn't they hang the nazis at Nuremberg for just "following orders?"

Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen’s decision to enforce new red flag laws — which allow for temporary confiscation of guns for people a judge deems “at risk” — has spurred a campaign to have him recalled.

Dawn Principe, owner of Sage Hill Arms gun store in Winnemucca and member of the 1,600-member Facebook group behind the recall campaign, said members plan to file a notice of intent with the county on Thursday to recall the sheriff on the grounds he is not “standing up” for their rights. According to the county clerk, the group will have 90 days from when it files to collect 502 signatures and, if successful, proceed with a recall committee.

“They’re taking up a fight against me on something the Legislature has to do, and they think I have the authority not to follow the law,” Allen said in an interview Wednesday with The Nevada Independent. “I do oppose this law. However, it’s my not my job to oppose a law; my job is to enforce the law.”

Humboldt residents will file to recall sheriff after commissioners signed ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ resolution

Yeah, jackboot you go right ahead and enforce unconstitutional laws.

The law in america means absolutely nothing at all. See your president for further details which shift moment to moment.

TDS attempts another derail.

Anyone paying attention has noticed this long, long ago.

There are plenty of threads about Trump.

If you are mentally incapable of talking about anything in life other than Trump... then at least keep your mental disability in the threads about the topic your mental disability limits you too.

Believe it or not, the rest of us adults, have other things we would like to talk about.

 

[OnePercenter]

Good, weed 'em out! Didn't they hang the nazis at Nuremberg for just "following orders?"

Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen’s decision to enforce new red flag laws — which allow for temporary confiscation of guns for people a judge deems “at risk” — has spurred a campaign to have him recalled.

Dawn Principe, owner of Sage Hill Arms gun store in Winnemucca and member of the 1,600-member Facebook group behind the recall campaign, said members plan to file a notice of intent with the county on Thursday to recall the sheriff on the grounds he is not “standing up” for their rights. According to the county clerk, the group will have 90 days from when it files to collect 502 signatures and, if successful, proceed with a recall committee.

“They’re taking up a fight against me on something the Legislature has to do, and they think I have the authority not to follow the law,” Allen said in an interview Wednesday with The Nevada Independent. “I do oppose this law. However, it’s my not my job to oppose a law; my job is to enforce the law.”

Humboldt residents will file to recall sheriff after commissioners signed ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ resolution

Yeah, jackboot you go right ahead and enforce unconstitutional laws.

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

The Sheriff is a locally elected official, if the local electorate is dissatisfied with his or her "job performance" they are perfectly within their rights to demand a recall.
Just so you don't misunderstand my point (though some obviously will anyway) I'm addressing the local electorate's rights not whether the Sheriff should or shouldn't uphold State law, that's up to the Sheriff not you or I unless we live there.

So the electorate doesn't want he Sheriff to enforce State laws and a red flag court order? Can they do that?

 

[OnePercenter]

Good, weed 'em out! Didn't they hang the nazis at Nuremberg for just "following orders?"

Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen’s decision to enforce new red flag laws — which allow for temporary confiscation of guns for people a judge deems “at risk” — has spurred a campaign to have him recalled.

Dawn Principe, owner of Sage Hill Arms gun store in Winnemucca and member of the 1,600-member Facebook group behind the recall campaign, said members plan to file a notice of intent with the county on Thursday to recall the sheriff on the grounds he is not “standing up” for their rights. According to the county clerk, the group will have 90 days from when it files to collect 502 signatures and, if successful, proceed with a recall committee.

“They’re taking up a fight against me on something the Legislature has to do, and they think I have the authority not to follow the law,” Allen said in an interview Wednesday with The Nevada Independent. “I do oppose this law. However, it’s my not my job to oppose a law; my job is to enforce the law.”

Humboldt residents will file to recall sheriff after commissioners signed ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ resolution

Yeah, jackboot you go right ahead and enforce unconstitutional laws.

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

He swore an Oath to Uphold and Defend the COTUS as well. Learn before you spew.

How is he not defending the COITUS?

 

[OnePercenter]

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

Lol, what about his oath to the constitution of the United States? Or do you even care about that?

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

 

[westwall]

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

Lol, what about his oath to the constitution of the United States? Or do you even care about that?

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

 

[Ringel05]

Good, weed 'em out! Didn't they hang the nazis at Nuremberg for just "following orders?"

Humboldt County Sheriff Mike Allen’s decision to enforce new red flag laws — which allow for temporary confiscation of guns for people a judge deems “at risk” — has spurred a campaign to have him recalled.

Dawn Principe, owner of Sage Hill Arms gun store in Winnemucca and member of the 1,600-member Facebook group behind the recall campaign, said members plan to file a notice of intent with the county on Thursday to recall the sheriff on the grounds he is not “standing up” for their rights. According to the county clerk, the group will have 90 days from when it files to collect 502 signatures and, if successful, proceed with a recall committee.

“They’re taking up a fight against me on something the Legislature has to do, and they think I have the authority not to follow the law,” Allen said in an interview Wednesday with The Nevada Independent. “I do oppose this law. However, it’s my not my job to oppose a law; my job is to enforce the law.”

Humboldt residents will file to recall sheriff after commissioners signed ‘Second Amendment sanctuary’ resolution

Yeah, jackboot you go right ahead and enforce unconstitutional laws.

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

The Sheriff is a locally elected official, if the local electorate is dissatisfied with his or her "job performance" they are perfectly within their rights to demand a recall.
Just so you don't misunderstand my point (though some obviously will anyway) I'm addressing the local electorate's rights not whether the Sheriff should or shouldn't uphold State law, that's up to the Sheriff not you or I unless we live there.

So the electorate doesn't want he Sheriff to enforce State laws and a red flag court order? Can they do that?

They can demand a recall for any reason they see fit. Again the key is "elected official" as is the case in most jurisdictions in this country for the position of Sheriff. Sheriffs are accountable directly to the people who elected them first, then the State and Federal Constitutions. This is the way it's been since the mid 1600s in the American colonies and eventually the USA.

 

[OnePercenter]

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

Lol, what about his oath to the constitution of the United States? Or do you even care about that?

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

 

[OnePercenter]

Does the Sheriff have the authority NOT to follow the law?

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

The Sheriff is a locally elected official, if the local electorate is dissatisfied with his or her "job performance" they are perfectly within their rights to demand a recall.
Just so you don't misunderstand my point (though some obviously will anyway) I'm addressing the local electorate's rights not whether the Sheriff should or shouldn't uphold State law, that's up to the Sheriff not you or I unless we live there.

So the electorate doesn't want he Sheriff to enforce State laws and a red flag court order? Can they do that?

They can demand a recall for any reason they see fit. Again the key is "elected official" as is the case in most jurisdictions in this country for the position of Sheriff. Sheriffs are accountable directly to the people who elected them first, then the State and Federal Constitutions. This is the way it's been since the mid 1600s in the American colonies and eventually the USA.

So the people that elect the Sheriffs can decide what laws he/she can enforce?

 

[westwall]

Lol, what about his oath to the constitution of the United States? Or do you even care about that?

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

 

[Ringel05]

Enforcing any unconstitutional law is a violation of his oath.

He swore an oath to uphold State laws,

The Sheriff is a locally elected official, if the local electorate is dissatisfied with his or her "job performance" they are perfectly within their rights to demand a recall.
Just so you don't misunderstand my point (though some obviously will anyway) I'm addressing the local electorate's rights not whether the Sheriff should or shouldn't uphold State law, that's up to the Sheriff not you or I unless we live there.

So the electorate doesn't want he Sheriff to enforce State laws and a red flag court order? Can they do that?

They can demand a recall for any reason they see fit. Again the key is "elected official" as is the case in most jurisdictions in this country for the position of Sheriff. Sheriffs are accountable directly to the people who elected them first, then the State and Federal Constitutions. This is the way it's been since the mid 1600s in the American colonies and eventually the USA.

So the people that elect the Sheriffs can decide what laws he/she can enforce?

That's too simplistic a view, yes and no. The only way they can tell the Sheriff which laws to enforce or not is in the voting booth. Now just because a recall is demanded doesn't necessitate an automatic removal of the Sheriff, the Sheriff might beat the recall. Just because some are calling for a recall doesn't mean they all are. In this instance we have no idea.
In some other counties some Sheriffs are completely refusing to enforce the law and the county elected officials are declaring their counties as "gun sanctuaries" so there's an instate political battle going on between those counties and the Governor.

 

[OnePercenter]

Where is it mentioned in the constitution the words "red flag laws?"

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

 

[westwall]

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

That's nice. Due Process has not been followed. I can go to the judge and claim you're about to commit mass murder. I don't like you, for whatever reason, but according to these laws the judge can confiscate. Great way to disarm someone so you can do bad things to them more easily.

 

[Ringel05]

It's called DUE PROCESS, dumbass.

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

It's a sticky Constitutional subject, while there is some precedence in law, primarily in the area of spousal abuse and stalking where an individuals rights can be temporarily suspended it's still considered by many to be a violation of the Due Process Clause regardless of whether or not it's signed by a judge. That argument will probably rage on forever.
The biggest fear is that ultimately the Government and anti-gun individuals and organizations will abuse the Red Flag laws to side step the 2nd Amendment and begin gun confiscation on a large scale by changing the parameters concerning what constitutes a danger. There are those who claim that will never happen but in reality anything is possible, anything can happen.

 

[OnePercenter]

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

That's nice. Due Process has not been followed. I can go to the judge and claim you're about to commit mass murder. I don't like you, for whatever reason, but according to these laws the judge can confiscate. Great way to disarm someone so you can do bad things to them more easily.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge, due process has been followed.

 

[westwall]

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

That's nice. Due Process has not been followed. I can go to the judge and claim you're about to commit mass murder. I don't like you, for whatever reason, but according to these laws the judge can confiscate. Great way to disarm someone so you can do bad things to them more easily.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge, due Process has been followed.

No, it hasn't little simpleton. Go back to school. You're too ignorant for this conversation.

 

[OnePercenter]

Due process is an entitlement. Are you backing entitlements now?

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

It's a sticky Constitutional subject, while there is some precedence in law, primarily in the area of spousal abuse and stalking where an individuals rights can be temporarily suspended it's still considered by many to be a violation of the Due Process Clause regardless of whether or not it's signed by a judge. That argument will probably rage on forever.
The biggest fear is that ultimately the Government and anti-gun individuals and organizations will abuse the Red Flag laws to side step the 2nd Amendment and begin gun confiscation on a large scale by changing the parameters concerning what constitutes a danger. There are those who claim that will never happen but in reality anything is possible, anything can happen.

Then that's for the courts to decide, NOT the electorate.

 

[Flash]

One of the good things about the US is that the Sheriff is an elected position. That makes the Sheriff accountable to the people and not the filthy ass politicians and bureaucrats.

The highest law in the land is the Constitution and it says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If a Sheriff doesn't understand that then he doesn't need to hold the position.

Good for the people in the country for standing up for their Constitutional rights. We need more people to do that.

 

[OnePercenter]

One of the good things about the US is that the Sheriff is an elected position. That makes the Sheriff accountable to the people and not the filthy ass politicians and bureaucrats.

The highest law in the land is the Constitution and it says very clearly that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

If a Sheriff doesn't then he doesn't need to hold the position.

Good for the people in the country for standing up for their Constitutional rights. We need more people to do that.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

[Ringel05]

No it's not you imbecile. It's memorialized in the Bill of Rights.

Due process: fair treatment through the normal judicial system, especially as a citizen's entitlement.

Proving yet again that you are too stupid to engage in any conversations of any nature whatsoever.


Amendment 5
- Protection of Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property

No person shall be held to answer for a capital or otherwise infamous crime unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The red flag warrant is signed by a Judge.

It's a sticky Constitutional subject, while there is some precedence in law, primarily in the area of spousal abuse and stalking where an individuals rights can be temporarily suspended it's still considered by many to be a violation of the Due Process Clause regardless of whether or not it's signed by a judge. That argument will probably rage on forever.
The biggest fear is that ultimately the Government and anti-gun individuals and organizations will abuse the Red Flag laws to side step the 2nd Amendment and begin gun confiscation on a large scale by changing the parameters concerning what constitutes a danger. There are those who claim that will never happen but in reality anything is possible, anything can happen.

Then that's for the courts to decide, NOT the electorate.

I guess you are unaware that State and local judges are elected also........ And subject to recall if the electorate so decides. You never took Civics, didya.......... The electorate IS the State.........