Three More Sheriffs Tell Dear Leader to Piss Off

Print Friendly

From prison planet…

Following Oregon Sheriff Tim Mueller’s lead, three more Sheriffs in parts of Oregon announced Wednesday in letters to U.S. Vice President Joe Biden that they would refuse to enforce any federal gun laws that are unconstitutional.

Crook County Sheriff Jim Hensley told local reporters “I’m going to follow my oath that I took as Sheriff to support the constitution.”

“I believe strongly in the Second Amendment,” Hensley added, urging “If the federal government comes into Crook County and wants to take firearms and things away from (citizens), I’m going to tell them it’s not going that way.”

Hensley told KTVZ.COM that he read Sheriff Mueller’s letter and it spurred him to make a stand. “I said, you know what? It’s a clear statement. He hit the nail right on the head,” Hensley said.

Referring to the recent mass shootings that have been cited as justification to move to impose strict new laws, Hensley said “Banning firearms and magazines, that is not going to cure the problem.”

….

Hensley’s letter, like Mueller’s, states : “Any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the President offending the constitutional rights of my citizens shall not be enforced by me or by my deputies, nor will I permit the enforcement of any unconstitutional regulations or orders by federal officers within the borders of Crook County, Oregon.”

“In summary, it is the position of this Sheriff that I refuse to participate, or stand idly by, while my citizens are turned into criminals due to the unconstitutional actions of misguided politicians,” the letter concludes.

In comments to the media, Hensley added “Some people go so far as to ask, ‘Well, are you going to fight our military when they come to take our guns?’ I say absolutely not – we’re not going to get into a gun battle with our fellow citizens. But I will do everything in my power to defend their right to the Second Amendment.”

In addition to Sheriff Hensley, another Oregon Sheriff, Larry Blanton of Deschutes County, told reporters that he will also stand with the Second Amendment.

“Right now, I support the Constitution and I support the Second Amendment,” Blanton said. “I support our citizens and other citizens rights to own and bear arms. That’s my stand. Always has been, always will be.”

Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer also penned a letter to Biden, stating: “I will not tolerate nor will I permit any federal incursion within the exterior boundaries of Grant County, Oregon, where any type of gun control legislation aimed at disarming law abiding citizens is the goal or objective.”

“We live in a free society,” Palmer wrote, “and firearms ownership and the right to defend ones self from becoming a victim of a criminal act or from a far reaching government attempted to enact laws that are unconstitutional.”

Coos County Sheriff Craig Zanni wrote a letter to “the citizens of Coos County,” stating

“I have and will continue to uphold my Oath of Office, including supporting the Second Amendment rights of our citizens.”

“I will also continue to be an avid supporter of Oregon’s Concealed Handgun License Program and in protecting the confidential personal information of each license holder.” Zanni added.

Douglas County Sheriff John Hanlin also sent a letter to the Vice President saying that he “will refuse to participate in, nor tolerate enforcement actions against citizens that are deemed unconstitutional.”

Elsewhere in the country, Kentucky Sheriff Denny Peyman of Jackson County, blazed a trail earlier this week by assuring residents that he would not allow guns to be seized under his jurisdiction.

“They asked ‘how are you going to pull these guns?’, and I said ‘you are never going to pull a gun from Jackson County,” said Peyman, adding, “I am responsible for the people inside this county… I couldn’t justify, if Obama passes this, it doesn’t matter what he passes, the sheriff has more power than the federal people.”

Minnesota, Pine County Sheriff Robin Cole wrote an open letter to his residents to inform them that he does not accept that the federal government supercedes State authorities when it comes to regulation of firearms.

“I do not believe the federal government or any individual in the federal government has the right to dictate to the states, counties or municipalities any mandate, regulation or administrative rule that violates the United States Constitution or its various amendments.” Cole wrote.

Cole said that the right to bear arms is “fundamental to our individual freedoms and that firearms are part of life in our country.”

The Sheriff said he would refuse to enforce any federal mandate that violates constitutional rights, and that he would consider any new federal regulation on guns to be illegal.

In Alabama, Madison County Sheriff Blake Dorning told WHNT News 19 that his office will not enforce new gun control legislation if he feels those laws violate the Second Amendment.

“The federal authorities can try to enforce it,” said Dorning. “I’m the Sheriff of Madison County. I took a constitutional oath to defend the Constitution of the United States of America, to defend the Constitution of the State of Alabama, even if it takes my life. That is my position.”

In Texas, Smith County Sheriff Larry Smith has also said he will not enforce an unconstitutional law that takes away firearms from law abiding citizens in Smith County.

“I will not enforce an unconstitutional law against any citizen in Smith County. It just won’t happen.” Smith said.

In Florida, Martin Co. Sheriff Bill Snyder says that any gun control legislation will not matter and it won’t change how he and his deputies do business, because he is not empowered to enforce Federal Law.

Rest assured, there are many more Sheriffs, as well as state and local police who know that they are not required to enforce Obama’s gun control executive orders.

Richard Mack, founder of The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, and a regular guest on the Alex Jones Show commented “Now we have good sheriffs who are standing up and defending the law against our own president.”

“I will tell Mr. Obama and everybody else who wants to impose gun control in America, that whether you like it or not, it is against the law,” said Mack.

The 23 executive orders Obama announced yesterday apply only to the federal government, not local or state law enforcement. Without action by the House, it is therefore unlawful to enforce the decrees on sheriffs and other law enforcement departments across the nation.

Share Button

  23 comments for “Three More Sheriffs Tell Dear Leader to Piss Off

  1. mithrandir
    January 21, 2013 at 7:24 pm

    According to Will Grigg, one should not put their trust in federalized sheriffs.

    I do not know if there is a difference between the sheriffs he talks about and the ones from this article.

    • Eightsouthman
      January 21, 2013 at 7:52 pm

      Mithrandir, I read the article and know that Larry Smith was one he specifically mentioned, a former ATF agent who participated in the Waco Branch Davidian’s slaughter. Smith County has been on the “way bad” radar since the early 80’s when two of their former undercover officers were doing so mandy drugs they were finally busted. They claimed they were just doing a bang up job and I guess they were since they were addicted to everything you can think of. I believe Paris Texas, was the operating territory for another of that cabal, Jim Blakely who later served a couple-three terms for Nolan county sheriff and was eventually busted by the feds on the only charge I guess they felt they could readily get him on, “misuse of public funds’ or something similar. It was rumored he sold lots of pot and other drugs through a large smuggling ring in the county but never proven. The other sheriff dept.’s he named you can be sure have taken countless millions of fed money, mainly from the DEA to harass and steal from countless otherwise law abiding people. They are, as he said, bound to do the fed’s bidding since that’s part of taking their money. Any sheriff’s dept that takes anything has to sign papers saying they’ll do the fed’s bidding from there forward. It’s standard procedure.

      • Tor Munkov
        January 21, 2013 at 9:18 pm

        Full government control of all activities of the individual, that is the goal of all the national parties.
        – Ludwig Von Mises

        Look at the ridiculous ATF affiliated website – StopHoustonGangs. http://www.stophoustongangs.org/

        Are these type of sites meant to scare gangbangers with negative press in cyberspace?

        Or is this moronic propaganda, such that even the most rudimental Clover can recognize as absurd. They devalue the currency to throw it away on touchy-feely nonsense about crime. What they’re really doing, is making sure that even on the internet, you cannot escape their idiocy, they are still hot on everyman’s trail.

        What is a gang?
        http://stophoustongangs.org/default.aspx?act=frontpage.aspx&name=What+Is+A+Gang

        When a Gang Becomes an Organized Criminal Enterprise
        http://stophoustongangs.org/default.aspx?act=frontpage.aspx&name=Organized+Crime

        Houston Area Regional Gangs (Includes Waco, TX)
        http://stophoustongangs.org/default.aspx?menuitemid=756

        I looked everywhere on this site, but it only lists minor petty criminal groups. Where are the Municipal, County, State, Federal, and Multi-National gangs listed?
        _________________________________
        From ATF – Houston Regional Field Office, you can visit

        ATF Afilliate Site: Stop Houston Gangs dot Org
        ___________________________
        EXIT NOTICE
        You are now leaving the ATF public web server and are going to a web site that ATF does not control whose privacy policies may differ.

        Thank you for visiting our site.

        You can access
        stophoustongangs dotorg
        by choosing ‘Continue;’ otherwise choose ‘Cancel.’

        We hope your visit was informative and enjoyable.
        __________________________

        • January 21, 2013 at 10:33 pm

          Dear Tor,

          The government webpage wrote:

          Organized crime is defined by the FBI as any group having a formalized structure whose primary objective is to obtain money through illegal activities. Gangs perpetuate control of enterprises and illegal activities through threatened and actual violence, graft, and extortion. Turf wars and gang pride are still important however, the focus becomes more about the money.

          Is that a perfect description of “The Government” or what?

          • Tor Munkov
            January 21, 2013 at 10:43 pm

            Dear Bevin,

            How does one hoist them on their own petard?

            http://www.ehow.com/search.html?s=hoist+on+own+petard&skin=corporate&t=all

            There are no results or instructions.

          • ozymandias
            January 21, 2013 at 10:49 pm

            “through illegal activities”

            decoloration of law activities?
            albino law?
            clorox law?
            exsanguinated law?
            the bleach blonde bench?

          • January 21, 2013 at 11:04 pm

            Dear Tor,

            “How does one hoist them on their own petard?”

            That’s actually a very good question.

            Let me think about it.

  2. Tor Munkov
    January 21, 2013 at 6:47 pm

    Piss Off ‘Bama, We Got Dis! – American Share-grifts/Rent-A-Sheilas
    http://www.youtu.be/NX9Malh9aqE

    http://www.youtu.be/A54P05aVODU

  3. Ferret
    January 21, 2013 at 5:51 pm

    “In Florida, Martin Co. Sheriff Bill Snyder says that any gun control legislation will not matter and it won’t change how he and his deputies do business, because he is not empowered to enforce Federal Law.”

    To say this statement is suspect would be an understatement, seeing as how not a single sheriff or police chief in Florida ever met a federal agency they didn’t like. Their chronic addiction to federal money ensures that they will march in lockstep to the drumbeat of the latest war on [whatever]. I don’t believe for a second that they would hesitate to have their costumed goons kicking in doors and seizing the “banned item du jour” if their next fix of sweet, sweet revenue was in even the slightest danger of being cut off.

    • MoT
      January 21, 2013 at 7:00 pm

      All of these so-called “brave” sheriffs are full of shit. They regularly enforce SWAT raids and drug sweeps with guns drawn on innocents. If they were honest, and that would take a stretch, they’d say, “no” and not take Uncle Sams candy. How many do you think will stop doing that?

  4. IndividualAudienceMember
    January 21, 2013 at 5:24 am

    The title says it all:

    Put Not Your Trust in Federalized Sheriffs

    by William Norman Grigg

    http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w305.html

  5. Tor Munkov
    January 17, 2013 at 10:25 pm

    For those who care(I find it trivial), Rand Paul is launching an inside the beltway offensive against Obama’s Executive Orders.

    http://rt.com/usa/news/gun-executive-actions-president-210/

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2979211/posts

    • mikehell
      January 17, 2013 at 11:50 pm

      If Rand’s law makes it to the floor, I bet the Repubs don’t vote for it. Fascists.

      • January 18, 2013 at 12:04 am

        Dear Mike,

        No takers.

        Opposition parties, so-called, in “advanced democracies” never really oppose the ruling party’s abuse of power.

        Why should they?

        They’re merely waiting for their turn at bat. They’re merely waiting for their own chance to abuse increasingly centralized power.

        Our vaunted “two party system” purportedly provides “checks and balances” of a sort.

        Bullshit. The major parties are merely two mob “families” taking turns being the “capo di tutti capi.”

        That’s why Newt Gingrich’s “Contract with America” never did jack.

        • BrentP
          January 18, 2013 at 2:19 am

          Bevin… you were going so well with the mob analogies and then missed the easy one… “Contract _on_ America” :)

        • Eightsouthman
          January 21, 2013 at 7:03 pm

          Bevin, I finally have to weigh in on this one. Probably most of you(and I hope all of you)have never had to deal with the feds or the state but I have in a very real way. I think you do a great disservice to the mob when you compare them to any govt. entity. The mob is businessmen and as such, know you must make a profit(not the bullshit you see on tv)and if they kill your business they won’t have any source of graft. The mob may even bring you more business so you can in turn pay them more money, not always a bad deal.

          Do I even need to enumerate what the govt. does. These people(and I use that term loosely), don’t give a damn if you live or die, how much you can pay nor anything else. They come for everything and don’t care if you give it to them or they take it from your estate after they have killed you. See the difference?

          • January 21, 2013 at 9:50 pm

            Dear Eight,

            “I think you do a great disservice to the mob when you compare them to any govt. entity.”

            Point taken!

  6. mikehell
    January 17, 2013 at 3:03 pm

    I’m glad to see these sheriffs taking a stand. I think it just goes to show that nothing motivates people like a threat to personal property, in this case their guns. Curiously, the notion of property does not normally extend to one’s own self; hence, sheriffs all over the US tolerate the now very mundane violations of the fourth amendment against unreasonable search and seizures that occurs at all airports. What does the contradiction mean for us? I guess that over time the state will have an easier time taking our bodies than our guns. If only guns had a voice: “From my cold steel trigger….”

    • January 17, 2013 at 11:18 pm

      Dear Mike,

      Nice insight!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *