[Will Beararms]

You do know there are Heroes among the ranks of our Men and Women in Blue who are making a stand and making it public they will not enforce laws that strip away our gun rights. With all that is going on, it's important to know this and thank them if you have the chance to. They are putting their jobs on the line even more than they already do now. Thanks for taking time to consider this.

[AK_Stick]

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

[.264 magnum]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

What a crock.

[MotoGlock]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

How stupid.

What a crock.


Answer this:

If a restaurant owner decides to poison his/her customers ,

Do you excuse the chef? It's his job to follow orders, right?

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by MotoGlock

How stupid.

What a crock.


Answer this:

If a restaurant owner decides to poison his/her customers ,

Do you excuse the chef? It's his job to follow orders, right?

Congratulations on being one step above a Nazi attempt.



But you're trying to compare apples and oranges.


Its more like, you work in a fast food restaurant, you walk in and you tell the boss I'm not cooking fries today.



Cops do not make laws. They enforce them. And last I checked, they're not SC justices.

[Plasticman84]

My Sheriff has said that he will not enforce an AWB. The Sheriff is my boss. Should I still be fired? What about my sheriff?

[dugo]

Originally Posted by Plasticman84

My Sheriff has said that he will not enforce an AWB. The Sheriff is my boss. Should I still be fired? What about my sheriff?

A lot of people might vote for him.

[MotoGlock]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

Congratulations on being one step above a Nazi attempt.



But you're trying to compare apples and oranges.


Its more like, you work in a fast food restaurant, you walk in and you tell the boss I'm not cooking fries today.



Cops do not make laws. They enforce them. And last I checked, they're not SC justices.

In your mind breaking a free americans' constitutional right is ok. You are comfortable with it so long as its written into some asinine, unjust law. Never mind if it contradicts the bill of rights so many men died for!

To me it's criminal!

I'm assuming you yourself have taken the oath to uphold the constitution? Maybe your interpritation of it is different that mine. Maybe your moral valuesnare different thatn mine.

You are okay with law enforcement or a soldier taking our freedoms. Where do you draw the line?
Hitlers men who killed and or helped kill millions of people where merely following ordered right? Oh excuse me they were doing they're jobs like the mindless drones they where?

Okay

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by MotoGlock

In your mind breaking a free americans' constitutional right is ok. You are comfortable with it so long as its written into some asinine, unjust law. Never mind if it contradicts the bill of rights so many men died for!

To me it's criminal!

I'm assuming you yourself have taken the oath to uphold the constitution? Maybe your interpritation of it is different that mine. Maybe your moral valuesnare different thatn mine.

You are okay with law enforcement or a soldier following breaking out freedoms. Where do you draw the line?
Joyless men who killed and or helped kill millions of people where merely following ordered right? Oh excuse me they were doing they're jobs like the mindless drones they where?

Okay

Just because YOU feel its unconstitutional, doesn't mean it is.


Last time I checked, we've got a way to challenge things we think are unconstitutional. And its in use quite often.


Last time I checked, letting cops decide what laws were constitutional wasn't how that was figured out.

[Ragnar]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

So, if you were told by your commander to strafe known civilian noncombatants from your helicopter, you would do it? You wouldn't refuse? Nice.

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

So, if you were told by your commander to strafe known civilian noncombatants from your helicopter, you would do it? You wouldn't refuse? Nice.

There is a very large difference between enforcing a legal AWB, that you may not like, or agree with, and killing civilians.

Yet the fact that so very many of you can't actually combat what I've said without striving to make such a silly comparison highlights it perfectly.


Your feelings, do not have any bearing upon something being unconstitutional. I can claim all day long that the GCA of 68' and 86' are unconstitutional. But I still have to abide them.

[GeneralSnafu]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

There is a very large difference between enforcing a legal AWB, that you may not like, or agree with, and killing civilians.

Yet the fact that so very many of you can't actually combat what I've said without striving to make such a silly comparison highlights it perfectly.


Your feelings, do not have any bearing upon something being unconstitutional. I can claim all day long that the GCA of 68' and 86' are unconstitutional. But I still have to abide them.

It seems you have changed your tune a bit. What you're posting now, isn't what you were arguing earlier.

You would have been right at home working under Hitler in Nazi Germany. You're the kind who gives cops a bad name. You certainly don't understand how the law works or evolves.

I'll bet you think, when a judge instructs a jury, they are required to base their verdict on what he says. Nothing can be further from the truth. You are free to return your verdict based upon your own moral judgment. That's how precedents are set and laws are changed. The same theory applies to your obligation to perform an act simply because, you have been directed to do so by some morally bankrupt superior.

[BlackPaladin]

Originally Posted by GeneralSnafu

You would have been right at home working under Hitler in Nazi Germany. You're the kind who gives cops a bad name. You certainly don't understand how the law works or evolves.

He is not a police officer, he is a member of the armed forces and generally a good guy here.

AK, I respect your opinion, because I know you are trying to make a valid point. I respectfully disagree with your point and feel that our country may reach a point of "this vs that". In matters of that nature, one has to decide where their loyalties stand.

[Flying-Dutchman]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

“I was just following orders.”

[DoubleWide]

No AWB laws are passed. These LEOs are expressing their thoughts.

Let's take a look at different amendments and possible future laws. I mean that's what we're talking about, right?


4th - People start talking about passing laws that allow the police to search and seize property without search warrants and probable cause

13th - People start talking about passing laws that allow the police to allow slavery and involuntary servitude for outstanding debts

19th - People start talking about passing laws to arrest women for voting

Would you have a problem with Sheriff speaking his mind about any of these?

I mean, come on, what's 22 years of involuntary servitude while you wait for the Supreme Court finally hear and decide the case.

[Geko45]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

In the military we were held accountable for any unlawful order we carried out. It was not considered a defense to claim that you were "just following orders". I don't see why a police officer being given an unconstitutional order should have any less burden than the military does in this regard.

We have not seen it in this country in many years, but laws can and do get passed that are unjust, unethical and immoral. Just because it has an official seal on it does not mean you should blindly enforce it.

[M&P Shooter]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

I 100% disagree! If a law is passed and is a violation of the Constitution a true LE officer would not enforce that in just law. If Obama and his Nazi's decide we have too many children in the U.S. and order public executions of couples 2nd child should LE officer obey and shoot those kids in the head?

[Bill Lumberg]

This. It's like a doctor renouncing the hippocratic oath. If they want to become a civilian because of their sentiments, fine, but it's not appropriate for a sworn office.

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

[Cmacc]

The fallacious concept that we have 3 coequal branches of government will eventually ruin this nation. The idea that 9 boneheaded lawyers who hold appointed positions for life can make the final decision about what our laws are or are not is tyrannical. It was not the intention of the majority of the nation's founders.

The congress created the SCOTUS, funds the SCOTUS and can overrule or limit the jurisdiction of the SCOTUS. There is a reason we call their rulings "opinions". The congress is most closely elected by the people and is the supreme ruling body of our land, next is the president or chief executive and finally the SCOTUS.

Are our contemporary legislatures and presidents too weak or ignorant to govern properly? Yes, but that doesn't change the system as designed. The concept of the "coequal judicial branch" and the supremacy of previous case law came out of Harvard Law School and the warped brain of Christopher Colombus Langdell in the late 1800s. The degradation of the nation by lawyers has continued ever since.

Just my opinion.

[Glock20 10mm]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

Fulfilling an oath does not mean blind obedience. Sorry but a line must be drawn somewhere and those that have stepped up and said they will not enforce confiscation orders have drawn the line. They understand that the Constitution outweighs any laws that VIOLATE IT. They understand their oath much better than those that won't disobey.

[OctoberRust]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

So by your standards then, a lot of Hitler's men did a great job, and their secured jobs at auschwitz were justified, because they followed orders and enforced rule of law?

Interesting logic.

[sheriff733]

Originally Posted by OctoberRust

So by your standards then, a lot of Hitler's men did a great job, and their secured jobs at auschwitz were justified, because they followed orders and enforced rule of law?

Interesting logic.

I know he doesn't mean it like that, but this is exactly what I kept imagining.

Good post.

[AK_Stick]

Originally Posted by OctoberRust

So by your standards then, a lot of Hitler's men did a great job, and their secured jobs at auschwitz were justified, because they followed orders and enforced rule of law?

Interesting logic.

Yes, exactly, they stood up and said "this is wrong, we don't believe in it "

Quit trying to grasp at straws. It won't work, and it's a terrible comparison.

[racerford]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

A lot are Sheriffs and they are elected. The courts have upheld that the police have discretion. They do not have to enforce every law all the time, as they have limited resources. Prosecutors do as well.

The president has publicly stated they will not enforce certain immigration laws in certain cases. Has he been fired? Has he been impeached? Has the head of the immigration department been fired for following that order?

They are following the path of the President of the United States. If they are wrong, then he is wrong. Remove them all. Or deal with it. A law does not have to ruled unconstitutional to be BE unconstitutional. This is evidenced by the fact that once it is ruled unconstitutional it is null and void from the date of passage, not from the date of ruling. This topic was discussed by our founding fathers.

Really all the Sheriff can do is not arrest or not report people for those actions. The DA decides who gets prosecuted. So you could go file a complaint when someone breaks those laws the Sheriff refuses to act on and see if the DA will prosecute based on the evidence you bring. Good Luck with that, it might make you very unpopular in some circles.

[Fear Night]

Originally Posted by AK_Stick

I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.

How is it any different than refusing an order to round up and detain groups of citizens in FEMA camps?

How is it any different than refusing to go door to door and search inside every home with drug dogs?

How is it any different than refusing to execute citizens on the spot for not complying with new XYZ law?

There has to be a line in the sand somewhere, right?