Nationwide Sheriff's and lawmakers agree with Peyman

Posted in the McKee Forum

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
wtf

Virgie, KY

#1 Jan 17, 2013
With the debate raging, and the media playing to yellow journalism and sensationalism, and Obama's shamless exploitation of the Sandy Hook shooting to push a political agenda he has always had, few are taking into consideration that the US is not above attack from foreign and domestic enemies. Nor is the US above another civil war or internal revolt. This very real possibility is going ignored. What is the real motive for disarming or attempted disarming of US citizens which are nessary for the security of a free state.

From Alaska to Alabama state lamakers and Sheriff's are taking a stand.
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/Gun-Control-...
wtf

Virgie, KY

#2 Jan 17, 2013
I forgot to mention, we also need protection from thugs, crazies, and politicians.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#3 Jan 17, 2013
wtf wrote:
......few are taking into consideration that the US is not above attack from foreign and domestic enemies. Nor is the US above another civil war or internal revolt......
True. We had a civil war before when certain states attempted to take matters into their own hands and nullify federal law. We all know how that ended in 1865.
wtf

Virgie, KY

#4 Jan 17, 2013
Honest Babe wrote:
<quoted text>
True. We had a civil war before when certain states attempted to take matters into their own hands and nullify federal law. We all know how that ended in 1865.
Point remains the same. And it seems then the federal law was based in morality, today's politicians are motivated by self greed, immoral agenda's and taxpayers dollars.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#5 Jan 17, 2013
wtf wrote:
<quoted text>
Point remains the same. And it seems then the federal law was based in morality, today's politicians are motivated by self greed, immoral agenda's and taxpayers dollars.
Yeah, I think you said a whole mouthful there. Regardless, are you in favor of another civil war due to local and state governments refusing to comply with Obama's "23 executive orders"?

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/17/the_23_execut...

I mean, at this point, what exactly are local and state lawmakers standing up for us against?
At least he tried

Mckee, KY

#6 Jan 18, 2013
He is getting support nationwide.If enough sheriffs take a stand our elected lawmakers might take a stand against socialism.
Trenton

Virgie, KY

#7 Jan 18, 2013
He did not start this movment Richard Mack started this last year and he is training sheriffs across the country on what to say in their public speeches, oh btw they are asking for 200,000.00 so they can have a sheriff convention to teach sheriffs how to be constitutional sheriffs so send your money to peyman he will utilize well. Scam!!!

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#8 Jan 18, 2013
Trenton wrote:
He did not start this movment Richard Mack started this last year and he is training sheriffs across the country on what to say in their public speeches,.......
True. Furthermore, there is really nothing sheriffs can do to prohibit enforcement of federal law.
wtf

Virgie, KY

#9 Jan 18, 2013
Honest Babe wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I think you said a whole mouthful there. Regardless, are you in favor of another civil war due to local and state governments refusing to comply with Obama's "23 executive orders"?
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/17/the_23_execut...
I mean, at this point, what exactly are local and state lawmakers standing up for us against?
Absolutely not in favor! Maybe they are standing up for what they believe in, for the oath they took serious, for precious rights of freedom, which are worth fighting against an intrusive politican for. Maybe it's the principal. I can't answer for them, but what I hear is they aupport the consitution, and the right to defend yourself. Hitler disarmed the Jews, we know the rest of the story.
Frank

Annville, KY

#10 Jan 18, 2013
I am like everyone! Screw the government they can't have my guns! But federal government be sure to send my check t the first of the month and one food stamps, cheese, medical card and money for roads and housing.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#11 Jan 18, 2013
wtf wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely not in favor! Maybe they are standing up for what they believe in, for the oath they took serious, for precious rights of freedom, which are worth fighting against an intrusive politican for. Maybe it's the principal. I can't answer for them, but what I hear is they aupport the consitution, and the right to defend yourself. Hitler disarmed the Jews, we know the rest of the story.
I am glad they are standing up for what they believe in. However, if they took seriously their oath to uphold the law, then that is exactly what they will do. If they cannot abide by that, they need to turn in their badge and then go stand up for what they believe as you and I stand for what we believe. It is not their place to decide which laws are constitutional or which laws to uphold.

Simply because you agree with them on this issue doesn't mean you will agree with them the next time they might decide a law is unconstituional and refuse to uphold it. That is something everyone better think about.

The power to make a decision as to the constitutionality of federal laws lies with the federal courts, not with the sheriffs.
Answers

Virgie, KY

#12 Jan 18, 2013
Honest Babe wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, I think you said a whole mouthful there. Regardless, are you in favor of another civil war due to local and state governments refusing to comply with Obama's "23 executive orders"?
http://www.salon.com/2013/01/17/the_23_execut...
I mean, at this point, what exactly are local and state lawmakers standing up for us against?
A Dictator.

Check these out and ask yourself why have they have cut back on teaching history in schools.
http://voxvocispublicus.homestead.com/Battle -...
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/article-nazila ...
and The Dick Act of 1902.
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares:A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep
and bear arms, SHALL NOT be infringed.
CATWOMAN

Mckee, KY

#13 Jan 18, 2013
Did you know that in the last month..that 250,000 people joined the NRA?? at a cost of what-$50 to $100 per membership?(sorry, been along time since I was a member) They are still trying to calculate how many automatic weapons have been sold in that same 30 day window..if they have released the number yet..I have missed it...but the number of guns sold must be very high..........Now...who might possibly PROFIT from scaring every AMerican into thinking that their guns are going to be taken away. AT Least think about it..... BIG BIG money has been spent on guns, ammo, and NRA memberships in the last month....BUT I am sure that all those Executives at the NRA will probably donate a portions of the proceeds of profits of the memberships that came in as a result of scare tactics, to some really great charity.... LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO sure they will... and before you start...I do believe in free enterprise and making a profit.....JUST NOT on the backs of the 26 victims at Sandy Hook.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#14 Jan 18, 2013
Answers wrote:
<quoted text>
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution declares:A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep
and bear arms, SHALL NOT be infringed.
I absolutely agree that is what the Second Amendment states. However, I am not debating whether Obama is or is not a dictator.

All I am saying is that if you are truly worried about gun rights, preserving your Second Amendment rights, etc...then your time would be best spent contacting legislators who have the authority to change laws, not the sheriffs whose roles are to enforce the laws.
wtf

Virgie, KY

#15 Jan 18, 2013
The laws go through three legislative branchs and are signed into law by the president, not decided by the president, one politician, to decide what is or is not constitutional, one who has no respect for it or who not would have been trying to circumvent it. Your post is hypocritical.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#16 Jan 18, 2013
wtf wrote:
The laws go through three legislative branchs and are signed into law by the president, not decided by the president, one politician, to decide what is or is not constitutional, one who has no respect for it or who not would have been trying to circumvent it. Your post is hypocritical.
No, my post is not hypocritical. Federal legislators pass federal laws, not local sheriffs.

I never stated the president or one politician decides what is constitutional.

In post #11 I stated...The power to make a decision as to the constitutionality of federal laws lies with the federal courts, not with the sheriffs.

That is a simple fact, not hypocrisy.
wtf

Virgie, KY

#17 Jan 18, 2013
Honest Babe wrote:
<quoted text>
No, my post is not hypocritical. Federal legislators pass federal laws, not local sheriffs.
I never stated the president or one politician decides what is constitutional.
In post #11 I stated...The power to make a decision as to the constitutionality of federal laws lies with the federal courts, not with the sheriffs.
That is a simple fact, not hypocrisy.
Well, we have to have consensus decision making and to do that you can't have a president saying I will not work with congress, I will sign an executive order. And you are correct in part and wrong in part. Sheriff's enforce the law, but an executive order banning guns would have been an unconstitutional law and an impeachable offense. Other than that, his spending is my next pick.:) Never a dull moment talking politics. I hear the spin but am hard to spin it on.

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#18 Jan 18, 2013
wtf wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, we have to have consensus decision making and to do that you can't have a president saying I will not work with congress, I will sign an executive order. And you are correct in part and wrong in part. Sheriff's enforce the law, but an executive order banning guns would have been an unconstitutional law and an impeachable offense. Other than that, his spending is my next pick.:) Never a dull moment talking politics. I hear the spin but am hard to spin it on.
Still yet, Article 3, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution grants the power to decide what is unconstitutional to the federal judges, not the sheriffs. Regardless, in the unlikely event of an executive order banning guns, as in confiscation of existing firearms, a sheriff would have no authority whatsoever to interfere with federal officers. LOL, goodnight :)

“Plumb Tickled To Death!”

Since: Mar 09

Shhhh! It's A Secret

#19 Jan 18, 2013
Oh, one last thing, NRA membership is $35 for one year. A magazine subscription is included so if one has an interest in guns or hunting the magazines are well worth the subscription cost.
Bryllyg

Virgie, KY

#20 Jan 19, 2013
Catwoman, I am very glad to hear someone bring this fact into the discussion and gun debate. Profit motivates many organizations and government officials. Many are quick to state the president is using the Sandy Hook and Colorado tragedy as good publicity; however, the NRA has also used this situation to their own advantage by incurring many new memberships. Let's not forget their affiliated companies- Remington and Winchester for example- have profited immensely from gun purchases on a massive scale in the last few weeks. This is a win/win situation for the NRA regardless of which side of the fence you sit on. Fear is also a big motivator for the public at this point in the game.

Let's look at the rationale - Obama is going to confiscate existing firearms. I can really find no proof that leads me to believe this will happen. I may be missing something. If anyone finds a reputable source detailing this executive action, send the link my way. But if that were the case I believe we would have already been in the midst of a civil revolt (no media gossip and speculation needed).

So, Obama gave "23 executive orders" [please click the link Honest Babe mentioned in a previous response - or just look up some other facts somewhere]. Memorandums. Discussions. These don't sound so bad to me... There have most certainly been orders declared straight from the executive branch that were much more heinous! Take Executive Order 9066 for example. This sent Japanese and German immigrants to internment camps located within the U.S. Yeah, that's a gem left out of most high school history books...

Now let's look at The Constitution - Article II, Section II of The Constitution is the origination of the "executive order". It's in the first clause, I believe. But this is a very debatable clause. It has been critiqued since the early days. But it's still there. In fact, most - if not all - presidents have used an executive order at one time or other during their term. Not all of them good sounding orders...Okay, so I suppose a President cannot be "impeached" using this as the basis for the debate. It should also be noted that the Senate holds the trial for impeachment (Article I, Section III).

So, who can change the Second Amendment and take away our guns? Well... let's see. Given the separation of powers and our system of checks and balances... And also to be noted is Article V of The Constitution. This basically says that any changes or amendments must be proposed by Congress. So, pretty much... the Second Amendment still stands. No one can walk in our homes and take our guns.

Where did the gun scare originate? Well, I'm sure the right winged mass media (aka Fox News) has just been eating this up. Things get exaggerated. Not bashing. Sometimes there are some good, decently honest stories from that station. There are also the far left stations. But I have heard rumor that it can be traced back to a Kentucky blog that declared the President was making a legal action to "take" military grade ammunition and guns from owners. I haven't found this though. So it may not even exist.

Just some food for thought! Goodnight! God Bless.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

McKee Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
who for judge gabbard or vaughn ? 5 hr keenan t 40
Add a Word / Drop a Word (Aug '10) 5 hr keenan t 2,787
Rhonda gabbard? 10 hr curious 9
Isaacs family (Apr '09) 12 hr Know them too 83
Six Letter Word Game (Jun '09) 13 hr Honest Babe 1,697
Word/Letter Game (Jun '12) 13 hr Honest Babe 65
Peyman Vindicated???? Bond PAYMENT DENIED! (Jun '13) Wed haha 141

Freeze Watch for Jackson County was issued at October 30 at 10:32PM EDT

McKee Dating
Find my Match

McKee People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

McKee News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in McKee

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]