It looks like the time is coming where our nations law enforcement will have to choose a side. No more, "I'm just doing my job sir" ****. Is the nations finest willing to uphold the Constitution, or do the bidding of the elected stooges?

Me and a couple of the guys were talking about that this morning. I don't know a single cop who is willing to confiscate guns or perform any other task that is against the 2A. We will actually be talking about making a press release stating the local FOPs official stance and make it known to our public.

I don't know bout anyone else....But, I can't be bribed or bought!

Job or no job...Patriot or punk?

Well, what's it gonna be?



I am sworn to an Oath, I shall never deny.


Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

There has been a number of sheriffs nation wide that have said they wouldnt enforce the feds law. I see in the write up on the EO`s there was one about giveing "incentives" to states to enforce the law. I suspect that incentive really is about cutting funds if THEY DONT enforce their laws. Just like the fed witholds collected gasline taxs that they kick back to states that comply with what they want for speed limits that states feel are unreasonable like the 55 mph limit years ago in the wide open spaces like montanna and wyoming years ago.

Several times in my 34 year career at local and federal levels, I took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. When I retired, I never had to relinquish that oath, procedurally, forcefully or voluntarily. If I was still working and told to do something I believed was wrong...I would respectfully refuse. I don't believe that government officials are solely responsible for upholding the Constitution. It is the duty of ALL Americans to do so, no matter their politics, interests or emotional urge. I also believe that individuals who may be faced with complying with a directive to relinquish a Constitutional Right should remember that "We the People" means each of us as citizens and not "we" the politicians who too often forget that they are nothing more than our representatives. I continue to write to my representative who responds in a form letter, clearly stating his personal position on an issue. So much for "representation."

That point raises another. If my "representative" is standing for everything that I'm not...then I assume that I'm not being represented. Therefore...why am I being taxed at all?

__________________
Term limits!

As far as them making the threat, Merril, you are no doubt right.

Well, I for one would love to see more states balancing their budgets, living within their means, and weaning themselves as much as possible from the government teat.

Yeah, I know - old people will starve, children will go uneducated and the streets will be filled with dying homeless without Big Brother helping to pay the bills.

Know what ? If that 'magical tap' was turned off this afternoon, folks would find a way to make do - and in many ways would be better off for it. The fed already pays for and controls much more than the Founders ever envisioned, and they have done it to extend their tentacles and power into every crevice in the nation to keep themselves in power.

__________________
Qui plantavit curabit

Good point made Ferrill
I was actually thinking about this same thing yesterday and
almost started a thread to ask just how many LEO's would
arrest someone they found, a person shooting a gun that
was just recently "banned". I'm talking about someone with
a high cap mag or a rifle with an (EVIL ASSAULT) feature.
Just a guy or gal minding their own business at a range.
If you as a LEO we're to happen upon someone doing nothing
more illegal than possessing. Turn your head or run them in????
Just curious...

Chuck

__________________
They hold no Quarter

The feds will use the carrot to enforce the stick, this is going to get real nasty.

__________________
Sure you did

I too am retired, but did not relinquish my oath, nor was I formally released from it. I am still bound, by that oath, to protect and defend the constitutions of the United States, the state of Oklahoma, and the state of Wyoming. If it comes to a show down, I'll gladly stand shoulder to shoulder with any officer, or person who is defending law abiding citizens whose constitutional rights are under threat by anyone, or any government body.

I was writing tickets on I89 during the 55 mph limit. I and many of my brother officers didn't write tickets unless someone was going over 70. Even at that, there were more than enough speeders to keep us busy. And as a side note, to "motivate" the state to put troopers on the Interstate they attached a clause to the federal funds with a formula mandating the number of hours we spent on that highway. We had to report each time we drove onto and off the interstate, for just this purpose.

I say as cops we should burn out the gun owners and haul them off to a camp somewhere with no tents.......no really we have talked about it too.and most will fight on the front lines against the new yankee army the comes south.

__________________
God save the SOUTH

I have taken this oath to defend the Constitution nine times in my life:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm)
That I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States
Against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;
That I take this obligation freely,
Without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion;
And that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office
On which I am about to enter;
So help me God.

I haven't un-taken it.

__________________
Halfway and one more step

Back in the day the feds used highway funds to "motivate" states into enacting helmet laws...

I have sworn a similar oath, and though I am no longer a police officer the oath stays with me. I will Uphold and Defend the Constitution of the United States...............

__________________
Even older, even crankier....

I wouldn't worry about the Yankee army - -seems those New Orleans cops were right quick to jump on the confiscation bandwagon following Katrina. And wasn't it that smooth talking Arkansas governor that got this rolling the first time around?

yes very true there Jst1mr.but alot of the police and deputies I work with are not taking anything from the people.

__________________
God save the SOUTH

Haven't the courts told states like Arizona that the local law enforcement agencies do not have the authority to enforce Federal immigration law? That should also apply to Federal firearms laws.

Virginia is with you, my friend. The "Mother of Presidents" will not lie down for tyranny in any form from any source.

__________________
SV,14,17,21,28,29,39,66,586

My friend, I do not think you will have to worry about "the new yankee army" coming from Indiana. As to LE not supporting the tyranny spewing from Washington, it's doubtful it will be a simple matter of "not arresting" or "not enforcing." Would that it be so easy. If your state fails to act in behalf of its citizens, a more serious decision likely will be forced, and the only recourse will be to surrender your commission.

No need to take your guns when they can tax you to death and take your house.

Right thar it is....^^^^^^^^^^^

Ya want yur Tobacco....We'll Tax it

Ya want yur Whiskey....We'll Tax it

Ya want ya Guns....We'll Tax 'em


And they's already got an Agency to over see it.


Su Amigo,
Dave

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

Civil police are by nature servants of the public, and follow a chain of command. Years ago police were generally recruited from the working class, now they are recruited in the collages and university's. The pay scale in the larger cities ,, even in smaller cities has advanced to a leval unheard of in the 60's. Then most then were recruited from veterens and HS grads. Ask any 50 + offricer how things are going. They will tell you of political interference, public oversight, and the dreaded political correct appearence required now.
Now officers are better paid, better trained, but they still are subjects of the administration, and their well being and livelehood depend on keeping the powers to be happy.
Ask yourself when and what would cause the police to openly refuse orders given by command officers or duly elected city fathers. What would be a illegal order??????
In the early 90's troopers were stopping vehicle's that had NRA, or gun motto's stickers. No tickets mind you. They were checking gun permits. A directive had come from headquarters stating that cars with such stickers would be good car stops...The younger troopers were doing just what they thought made the brass happy. Well the complaints started to flood the statehouse and that directive from DOJ was pulled and an apology was forth comeing...****mor has it some of the calls of complaint were being made by some older and wiser members of the Patrol...The question was raised "why would you just make a vehicle stop based on a legal bumber sticker, with NO other violation's observed....I might adsd a sticker that only expounded a constitutional right..
Just a thought...When or what would be over the line for the cop on the beat to make a decesion to refuse orders. I think not as easy as it sounds on it's face.....Time will tell or maybe this is a tempest in a tea-pot......Just something to think about.....

And thereby put at risk his ability to work in his chosen profession for the rest of his life, his livelihood and his ability to feed and care for his family, and even possibly his own liberty.

It is going to take a lot.

Or....even without the tax...Google "Poletown Battle".
detnews.com | Michigan History

PS: The cops did help "the government" take these peoples' houses, just like they'll take your guns when a constitutional amendment is passed and they're ordered to. Everyone's a constitutional tough guy until their livelyhood and their family's future is on the line. "You took an oath to uphold the constitution. The 28th amendment says no magazines over 5 rounds....." At least it will result in the value of my J-Frames skyrocketing!

Do not expect any help from the police. As stated above they will do as they are directed by their superiors. Most will not know the difference in the Constitutional rights. Most will be unfamiliar with guns and are scared of them. Since I am retired, I can express my displeasure with what I see as a major power grab. It's not about the guns, its about control.

__________________
Richard Gillespie
FBINA 102

I wouldn't about the big bad feds coming for your stuff. The EOs are pretty toothless, and I don't think a new AWB has a prayer of passing.

On the other hand, some good ol' boy lawmen in upstate New York are going to have to ask themselves some hard questions. But since these same staties, deputies, city cops and constables have apparently been enforcing the existing 10 round limit without many pangs of conscience, I suspect locking folks up for over 7 won't be a stretch.

The current administration and my fellow federales make a tempting target for "cold dead fingers" chest-thumping, but the worst offenders against the Second Amendment have been in state houses and Governor's mansions.

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

What concerns me is Janet Napolitano....Wasn't it just a few months ago we read about how the Homeland Security had bought up so much ammo? Just after O's speech, she comes out and says she will provide 1. Protection 2. Prevention, 3. Response, 4. Education and Research/Evaluation for "O" to achieve his agenda.

She also re-emphasized the "See something, Say something". So here will come a bounty "IMO" Turn in your neighbor and get a Bounty....

Has not our so called Leader, said he is all for an increase in a government sponsored type of police force...This would eliminate the military from becoming involve in knocking on your door. (If I'm not mistaken), another leader of a country tried it and it worked...aka Brown Shirts.

Yes, as MaxLawman said, tax everyone. You want to own a gun, in keeping with the 2nd A? No problem, It's going to cost you $1000 for the permit, and it must be renewed yearly. Therefore, you can still own a gun....I believe that's called a "FEDERAL EXCISE TAX"

Don't pay your taxes to the IRS? Then why does the IRS need all of those JHP's?

I know, I know, before someone says it...about that statement "Shall not be Infringed Upon"....Is a $1000 price of a permit an infringement? Didn't say you couldn't have a gun, just said it's going to cost you to own one, not counting the background check. Bet we will end up having to pay for that, no doubt...

Back to Napolitano.....Put a policeman in every school???? Why not put a armed Homeland Security guard at the entrance? Took care of that item on the wish list didn't it?

The cry for more policemen to make the streets safer.......I say we better be careful on what we get.


Unfortunately, as has been mentioned in blogs before mine, and has been answered by many others of the Retired in Blue....Brown too!!!!, Everyone says they will stand their ground...But, as for me....I have confronted bullies in a crowd, and I have confronted a bully alone against me. I know the answer to the question.....


WuzzFuzz

God Bless The South. Have relatives in the south and love to visit them. DIG YOUR HEELS IN! Our libral N.Y. polititicians sold us down the river in a flash. Andrew Cuomo is grand standing. He will be looking to run for president in a few years, and you think Obamas bad ! The pro gun protests are starting this weekend,but the laws a done deal.

Have they now? Local cops and constables have been enforcing the existing 10 round limit in New York? I've missed those reports.

__________________
- Change it back -

I applaud all those who say they'll stand by their oath.

In the end the question will become, how far will you go to uphold the Constitution?

Will folks really jeapordize their seniority, pensions, etc.?

I hope there is that much commitment.

It sure would be great to see a VOCAL organization of law officers OPPOSING the overreach of the government.

All I see where I live is constant support from the organized Chiefs of Police to 'get guns off the streets', supporting the efforts of the likes of Bloomberg and his 'mayor's group'.

In light of Heller, I would guess that some of the first court tests of the NY legislation will come over whether the various provisions of the new law are "reasonable", and what level of scrutiny the courts might apply. My constitutional law is rusty enough that I could not begin to guess how that might go without a few hours in the law library.

New York has had its own version of the AWB since the federal ban expired, a state law. Has it been completely unenforced? If so, great. If the local cops of the Empire State have been enforcing the 10 round limit, though, then why would you expect them not to enforce this new law?

__________________
“What you got, ain’t new.”

I expect the NY laws to be challenged up to SCOTUS. States may, as a rule, be more restrictive than federal law, but there comes a point of infringement upon the Constitution, and that is where the State authority ends. NY will no doubt result in more clarification of the limitations of gun control.

__________________
Even older, even crankier....

The 2A will last only until Obama's next appointment to the SJC.

Don't forget that the right to bear arms existed well before the Constituition. That will become very important.

Sir please be informed to the below links and see that whats happening in America is being taken very seriously and not a joke!!!

This declaration is what Thousands of us LEO's as of this writing will adhere to.

Oath Keepers * Blog Archive * Declaration Of Orders We Will Not Obey

Oath Keepers * Blog Archive * MESSAGE TO THE OATH BREAKERS AND TRAITORS:

Attached Images

bottom-image-07-980-500x167.jpg (34.1 KB, 12 views)

__________________
De Oppresso Liber Μολὼν λαβέ

Our forefathers did just that!!! that's why we have not only the 2nd Amendment but what is called the "Bill Of Rights"

__________________
De Oppresso Liber Μολὼν λαβέ

Hopefully you are correct, but I am not so sure a "new AWB ban" of some sort will not pass the Congress, especially if it is pretty mundane. Legislators are all about "compromise" and feel-good nonsense that they readily admit will do no good. It's just natural for them.

I agree with your assertion that a great deal of mischief occurs at the state and local level. We have little pockets of that here in Indiana.

James56, thank you for calling that to my attention. That's encouraging!

You're correct - what's happening is certainly no joke. There are determined people on both sides of the so-called "gun violence" issue and the potential for things to flare up and get really ugly seems increasingly possible.

Without too awful much in the way of dissemination........

Officer discretion, ring a bell


.

__________________
"IN GOD WE TRUST"

I don't see many of the law enforcement officers that I work with enforcing these useless laws. Many will be in violation themselves. Although I cannot encourage anyone to not comply with a law; my greatest hope is that one year from now when the grace period to register assault weapons is up that there is a big fat goose egg in the registry.

Whether folks comply or not almost doesn't matter.

Whenever otherwise law-abiding citizens come in contact with the law (domestic issues, etc.) they are likely to become convicted felons or bankrupt themselves defending themselves.

The whole effort begins with intimidation. The more folks they can intimidate into never buying a gun (to avoid criminality) the father they have progressed toward the ultimate goal.

Meanwhile, they'll use every resource necessary to build a registration database for when confiscation suits them.