This comes out of Texas !? I'm shocked !
Supporters of the 380 sheriffs in 15 states who so far have vowed to defy new state and federal gun control laws claim that legislation is starting to pop up around the nation to fire any state elected or appointed law enforcement official who doesn't obey federal orders.
The first effort emerged in Texas. Legislation proposed by Dallas Democratic Rep. Yvonne Davis would remove any sheriff or law enforcement officer who refuses to enforce state or federal laws.
What's more, it would remove any elected or appointed law enforcement officer for simply stating or signing any document stating that they will not obey federal orders.
the rest (though not much more) here: [*******#800080]http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/2525518[/COLOR]
the bill must die Texans defend your rights!
Sheriffs tend to be in a unique political/LEO position. Generally they are the most powerful LEO in a state.
I guess is just shows every state has their wacko elected official.
wait, you mean a LEO doesn't want to uphold the law that they're supposed to do ,and not expect to be fired ?
I thought that the whole reason the U.S. has Federal LE is to investigate violations of and enforce Federal Law. Is there a Federal Law that requires local LE to obey Federal Special Agents or enforce Federal Law?
The really ironic thing is that the DOJ, not local LE, is the failed link in enforcing insisting Federal Firearms Laws. In 2010, 76,000 people were prevented from buying a firearm as the result of a background check. Upon investigation, BATFE referred 4732 cases to the DOJ for prosecution. Of that number, 44 were prosecuted, and 13 were punished.
Apparently, when the NRA mentioned this in a WH meeting with Biden and AG Holder, Holder said something along the lines of "We have neither the time nor the resources to prosecute all of those cases." Okay... The DOJ isn't able to enforce existing laws, so the answer is to add more laws?
I think it boils down to state rights and county rights, local law enforcement heads and sheriffs are voted into office by the people in the community and county and they often get elected into office because they have the support and generally represent the views of the people in the community and if they get out of step then the people in the community and county have the right to get a recall vote to remove them from office and elect a new head of police or sheriff but that is the right of the people in the community to make that decision not the federal goverment or state.. If you get the goverment or state passing a law saying the goverment can remove a sheriff from office because he says he will not enforce a federal law that is contrary to laws on the state books regarding weapons and they say they will remove him from office for making that statement or taking that stance its hindering the peoples right to representation of their choice in the community of a selected and elected official by the people.
When Federal Marshal deputy(and later a famed gunfighter) Wyatt Earp pursuing murderers of his brother Morgan, he was several times hindered by local sheriffs with the threat of arrest.
The only reason that Earp was able to continue on his mission, was because his men were much better armed than local sheriffs at the time...
This would be unimaginable in most European countries.
Last I checked, local LEO is not obligated to enforce federal law.
This is crazy, prosecuting sheriff's for upholding the Constitution, because actually that's what they do. And what if the Fed's law contradicts with the Constitution? Also there is some crazy Federal laws/requirements that I simply don't understand, like the drinking age.
P.S. When I flew London-NY I was 20yrs. old and I was prohibited from drinking on the plane.