DU doesn't
UnrepentantLiberal (10,882 posts)
Sheriff says his plan for gun laws he dislikes is to not enforce them
Last edited Mon Mar 18, 2013, 03:19 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
A sheriff in Colorado has given the state's new gun control laws a metaphorical middle finger, declaring he and his office will simply not enforce them. Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said the new legislation, which puts a 15-round limit on ammo magazines and expands background checks, gives people a false sense of security. One new bill passed Friday and is expected to be signed by the governor within two weeks, but Cooke says the bills are "feel-good, knee-jerk" reactions to recent tragedies like the Aurora shooting. So he "won’t bother enforcing" them, he added, noting he and other sheriffs are considering a lawsuit.
More: http://now.msn.com/john-cooke-colorado-sheriff-says-he-wont-enforce-new-gun-laws
Cooke won’t enforce new state gun laws
Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he won’t enforce either gun-control measure waiting to be signed into law by Gov. John Hickenlooper, saying the laws are “unenforceable†and would “give a false sense of security.â€
-snip-
Cooke said Democratic lawmakers are uninformed but are scrambling in reaction to recent tragedies in the nation.
“They’re feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable,†he said.
Cooke said the bill requiring a $10 background check to legally transfer a gun would not keep firearms out of the hands of those who use them for violence.
“Criminals are still going to get their guns,†he said.
More: http://www.greeleytribune.com/news/local/5575283-113/gun-state-background-colorado
The Straight Story (40,274 posts)
1. If he said the same about pot smokers what would people say?
Guess it depends on which things we care about.
Either we agree with bucking stupid laws or we don't. Does not matter which ones really does it if you believe in the core ideal?
UnrepentantLiberal (10,882 posts)
3. They don't say that about pot smokers.
You get busted for that every time.
Bad analogy, libertarian guy.
ButterflyBlood (12,215 posts)
23. Some cities have LPE (lowest priority enforcement) policies
Basically the same. And before Washington legalized possession the Seattle DA said he'd dismiss all cases brought up for marijuana possession.
The Straight Story (40,274 posts)
25. Really? Let's take a look shall we:
Last I heard 26 states were showing their resistance to Obamacare by opting out of exchanges. Nine State Sheriffs’ Associations have put the Executive and Legislative Branches on notice that they will support the traditional interpretation of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights and 336 elected county sheriffs have inferred that they will protect their people on this issue — even against federal agents coming into their counties. Federal medical marijuana laws are openly defied by many states. States’ refusal to implement the Real ID Act, passed in 2005, is a form of resistance. When enough states say no, the feds will back away. Even Governor Jerry Brown, earlier this year, on federal mandated prison requirements suggested that the Federal Government back off, “We can handle our own prisons.â€
http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/friendswood/opinion/pease-hamilton-also-supported-states-nullifying-unconstitutional-federal-laws/article_476e7b35-0be2-5c08-ac6c-1a01f66a337c.html
Police Chief Refuses to Enforce New Marijuana Laws
http://hightimes.com/news/dan/4938
Feds intruding on Mendocino County sheriff’s jurisdiction
Back in June 2010, Mendocino County Constitutional Sheriff Tom Allman as the highest ranking elected law enforcement officer in the county responded to his citizens who helped elect him, issued permits to medical marijuana collectives that wanted to grow up to 99 plants, an exemption from the county's limit of 25 plants per parcel. Mendocino California is known for its marijuana crops which many believe is the leading industry in the county.
http://www.examiner.com/article/feds-intruding-on-mendocino-county-sheriff-s-jurisdiction
And labeling me a libertarian does not in any way detract from my argument - but nice try.
UnrepentantLiberal (10,882 posts)
29. You gun people memorize this minutiae
like militant Islamists memorize the Koran. [TRANSLATION: Curse you with your facts and logic!] 
Guns flowing unfettered out of the Deep South is the reason gangs in Chicago have unlimited access to hand guns?
We got minutiae for that! Lots of it. A river of minutiae protecting our carfully selected vantage point.
-----
Some of my positions on issues have undergone profound changes since the mid 90s because of arguments I've had on political forums through the years. I've radically changed other people's minds on issues as well. Highly intelligent people that I still email.
This is why I refuse to debate someone who has no intention of ever changing their position. I have little respect for them. I'll take a few pot shots at them every now and then but mostly ignore them.
mwrguy (722 posts)
4. Throw his ass in jail
And get a sheriff that will uphold the law.
And shut down all cooperation between state and local law enforcement.
green for victory (443 posts)
5. the difference b/w him and holder is...
the laws holder ignores affect more people?
pinboy3niner (26,329 posts)
6. Some SPLC background on 'Constitutional Sheriffs' movement
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2012/winter/resurrection
Thank heaven the unbiased and objective SPLC is on the case!
pinboy3niner (26,329 posts)
9. Yep
Several other sheriffs have made statements like this one. They may have enforcement discretion, but if they interfere with federal enforcement operations in their jurisdictions, as jberryhill has pointed out here before, they are subject to prosecution for obstruction of justice.
dairydog91 (711 posts)
14. True. But with no federal laws, are federal agents going to go in to enforce Colorado law?
UnrepentantLiberal (10,882 posts)
31. Could happen.
dballance (2,826 posts)
7. Then He Needs to Be Removed From Office for Dereliction of Duty.
He's a sheriff and not a properly convened court. He doesn't get to decide what laws are enforceable. Until a court decides the laws are not enforceable he is obligated to enforce them.
So take your feel-good reactions and get over yourself.
I let you remove the sheriff if we can impeach Obama.
bowens43 (14,021 posts)
10. shouldn't this be grounds for dismissal ?
malaise (103,870 posts)
15. And he is still the sheriff?? n/t
onenote (21,685 posts)
34. He received 70 percent of the vote in 2010 in a county that went for Romney by 55-42 in 2012
He isn't going anywhere.
Shankapotomus (2,038 posts)
18. There's nothing I'm looking forward
to more right now than the dismissal of Right Wing, gun slinging sheriffs all across this land of ours.
OUT: binge and purge
IN: purge and binge.
premium (90 posts)
19. Sheriff's are elected officials
and unless they are convicted of a crime, the only way to remove them is at the ballot box.
If his policy of non enforcement of those laws are popular with his constituents, then he'll more than likely be re-elected.
Shankapotomus (2,038 posts)
21. Diabolical!
Last edited Mon Mar 18, 2013, 10:29 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)
Hmm. Entrapment is sometimes illegal when the police do it to civilians but would it be illegal if used on police by civilians? Say if I planted a large sum of money where a sheriff could easily find it, reported the missing money, secretly filmed his confiscation of the money and waited to see what he did with it?
1) apparently you think democracy has no place at democraticunderground
2) you will NEVER have a large sum of money
premium (90 posts)
24. I'm not sure.
I would imagine that would be up to the local DA to judge if it's entrapment or not.
Shankapotomus (2,038 posts)
27. You know what
At that point, I wouldn't even care what the DA concluded because, if the sheriff pocketed some or all of the money and didn't inform me, I would have the evidence and proof and just go to the press at that point. It might not get the sheriff removed (if it was a really corrupt electorate) but it would do some damage to somebody who deserved it.
I would like to see more gonzo liberal journalists try this... I plan to attempt it myself in the near future ...
ButterflyBlood (12,215 posts)
22. Meh I'd approve if a sheriff said this about marijuana laws
So I won't complain.
FINALLY! Some ****ing honesty.
Ikonoklast (21,057 posts)
26. Wonder how Sheriff Shitstain would then feel about enforcing the law
if one of his deputies was shot by an alleged felon with a semi-automatic rifle that had a large-capacity magazine in the perpetration of a crime?
Except you assholes aren't trying to disarm felons.
You want to disarm honest people and let the criminals -- those poor, downtrodden souls -- have free run of our streets.
jmg257 (4,321 posts)
33. The Colorado shrieffs are elected officals, but the state legislature decides their salary.
Maybe a decrease in pay is in order for those who don't do their job of enforcing laws?
Actually the chickenshit ****bags have already thried that because they want political cover knowing full well the righteous indignation that awaits them next election cycle:
Colorado sheriff: Dems threatening raises over opposition to gun control
On Saturday, El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa told radio station KVOR that he received an email last week that said Democrats would either stop or stall pay raises for the state’s elected sheriffs if they did not support Colorado’s pending gun control legislation, The Blaze reported Sunday.
"I have not been directly threatened or coerced in any way nor would I tolerate any threat," he wrote on Facebook, but added that a message that was delivered verbally to a representative of the Colorado Sheriff's Association "basically stated that the Senate Dems are very upset with the Colorado Sheriffs opposing the gun legislation proposed by the Senate Democrats."
Maketa said he was “absolutely outraged by that. Number one, the salary bill for elected officials is a mandate of the legislature. Creating gun control is not a mandate, and in this case, there is no factual basis for it."
In the interview, Maketa said he made it clear the pressure being put on sheriffs borders on extortion and an attempt to influence a public official.
http://www.examiner.com/article/colorado-sheriff-dems-threatening-raises-over-opposition-to-gun-controlI bet the little tyrants wouldn't mind if those laws weren't enforced against their masters.
http://election.democraticunderground.com/10022527158
