Something to bear in mind with the sheriffs is that you have to read the fine print on the contract. Some of these guys are laying it on the line for real. Others may be simply grandstanding, or even helping to further obfuscate the matter.
Nonetheless, it is really kind of a hollow claim for any county sheriff to simply state: “I won’t enforce a federal gun ban,” and nothing else.
This is like me telling you I won’t be installing your cable when you order it.
I don’t work for the cable company. I don’t install cable. So it’s like a “complete verbal nonevent” for me to tell you this. Of course I won’t be installing it: I don’t work for the company that has the installation contract to do so. Someone else does.
So someone else will take care of that when it happens, not me. And for the very best of reasons: it simply isn’t my job.
Well, Roosevelt County New Mexico’s Sheriff Darren Hooker says he swore an oath to the U.S. Constitution, not to the federal government. So if a federal ban on assault rifles was to become a federal law, he’s made it clear it wouldn’t be enforced in the county. Sounds great!
But he goes on to state clearly:
“The sheriffs don’t enforce federal law, and therefore I wouldn’t have to worry about it,” Hooker said. “It’s a federal law and I don’t have to.”
So, this is a key factor worth considering…
I’m not picking on Darren Hooker. I’m sure his heart’s in the right place and thank him for standing up to be counted. He just happened to be in the right place with the right sound bite I needed to make my point here…
If Darren Hooker is right, then it means nothing for a county sheriff to simply tell you he won’t be enforcing any federal gun bans in your county. Because it isn’t his job. I assume it would fall to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), whoever — i.e: the feds — to get the job done on the ground. But whoever the job falls to, the feds have people for this, they don’t really need anyone else’s cooperation.
I believe what we want to hear these sheriffs saying, is: ” I won’t allow any federal gun bans to be enforced in my county.” Big difference. But is anyone really saying this? And if so, who?
At least one, Terry Box, has gone on record to state plainly that if it comes to going toe-to-toe with the feds over any federal gun ban enforcement, anything akin to a shooting match just ain’t going to happen. But he’ll shuffle whatever papers he can under the circumstances, and “fight for his constituents rights as best he can”, utilizing whatever administrative remedies that are at his disposal.
Understood. Thank you. That’s probably about as much as any average American county sheriff will do, if anything, or even can do if and when an authentic federal gun ban comes down the pike and the feds mobilize armed troops to effect the confiscations like they did during Katrina.
So, you know I always put these sheriffs up on a pedestal and erect a shrine around them whenever they come through here. It’s a great thing what they’re doing and the waves they’re making. Really they’re the best thing we’ve got going for us at this point. They are doing more than anyone to help generate some badly-needed grassroots groundswell.
But a simple reality check may be in order here and buyer beware. Never stop thinking. Never stop asking the tough questions, it’s not only your right but your duty under our social system of governance. Never stop considering everything and weighing out all the alternatives… thinking outside of the box. Always listen actively and for comprehension. If you can just do that you’ll always be ahead of the game, as it’s rapidly becoming a lost art: just actively listening…
So I think it’s time to dig in a little deeper here and take a harder look at just what any one and all of these sheriffs are really telling us and what it really means to us: what kind of outcome we can reasonably expect, whether that be on a case-by-case, county-by-county basis, or just generally speaking as pertains to us all for the sake of theory. Because we’re coming down to it and we really need to know.
It benefits us not for someone to tell us they’re not going to enforce something when it’s not their job in the first place, if it’s someone else’s job instead… We gain nothing through assurances of that nature. What I’d most like to know is what the sheriff intends to do when that crew comes around to do their job — point blank: if and when the feds ban anything “firearms-related”, and send their crew around to effect door-to-door searches and/or confiscations, fascist-style forced registrations, etc., what do you intend to do at that point, if anything? What are your intentions, what is your plan? And what outcome can I reasonably expect when the hammer comes down… and be specific: you’ll take this step if they do that, and you’ll take that step if they do this…
I think these are fair questions to ask your county sheriff, if you have any real interest in keeping 1) the feds out of your domecile, 2) your firearms, ammunition and accessories, and 3) your right to possess them and put them to good use , if and when the other shoe drops. Depending on his answers, you may want to be somewhere else.
We’ve been hearing a lot of buzz just lately, but what is this buzz really telling us we can use? What assurances is it providing us we can depend on? What does your county sheriff intend to do on a step-by-step, contingency basis, if and when federal troops or agents attempt to enter into the county to enforce these types of bans? Does anyone out there really have these questions settled in their own minds to their complete satisfaction? Because I don’t think so. At least generally speaking I don’t think we’ve resolved these questions, and it is these questions which are most crucial to the outcome.
In fact, the outcome is the question: what are we going to be looking at when the smoke clears. That’s our chief concern.
It’s time to separate the “fluff”, from the “stuff”. And maybe time to more seriously consider relocating to friendlier climes if you want to remain free. And particularly, free to exercise your right to own and bear the arms of your own choosing.
If nothing else, we still have the freedom left to vote with our tax dollars. If your city, county or state is jumping on the fascist bandwagon of police state politics and your best efforts to effect positive change don’t hold any sway, just pack up and move away to someplace where the elected officials grasp the meaning of the Constitution and are authentically dedicated to preserving it, taking your “tax base dollars” with you.
What I’m imagining now is a “what if they held a war and nobody came”-style scenario, but backwards, I suppose:
What if a state like New York or Connecticut passed Constitution-shredding firearms and freedom-suppressing legislation, and everyone just packed up and moved away, taking their “tax base” with them? Because that’s all these people really care about — power, control, wealth — and you need to wake up — now — and accept that for what it is, and what it means to you.
What would they do then, if such legislation-passage led to a mass exodus of taxpayers and there was suddenly no one left to fund all their good-ole boy pork barrel projects and pay their overbloated salaries? What if they passed such laws then looked up to find their cities and their towns deserted, their whole sphere of dominion reduced to a glorified nature preserve? And baby, squirrels don’t pay rent.
We have allowed ourselves to fall into the undesirable and completely unnecessary rut of just laying down to take whatever these corrupt politicians choose to heap on us with complete abandon and without consequence, and I’m telling you it does not have to be that way. But as long as these individuals never suffer any consequences for their fascist motivations, you’re going to continue getting raped, looted and pillaged until you have nothing left to call your own, including your freedom and your dignity.
(A little choppy break here, but I’ve been adding to this here and there in spurts over a period of hours, so…)
You know, I understand that someone can make a statement that is carefully constructed to sound like it’s saying something it isn’t. And the whole purpose of this construction is to sway you to latch onto the implied meaning, while retaining the ability to disavow that meaning was ever implied when push comes to shove and if things head south from there.
I once ran into this with a real estate agent we were considering using to sell our house. And she threw out a line which basically said: “I guarantee to sell your home in 90 days or less if you sign my contract.” But not really. Actually I caught it at the time and realized how cleverly that statement had been constructed. It was a real beauty someone had really put some work into. She hadn’t just thrown it out there off the top of her pretty little head. It was a scripted ploy… a professional “closing technique”.
Well we did sign her and she didn’t sell the house or really ever do much of anything after that. So I eventually found myself in the middle of a rather distasteful phone conversation with her, and I threw the line she’d used back at her for effect. And of course she automatically disavowed it’s meaning as any proper guarantee through it’s built-in existing “weasel clause”.
So I told her: ” I know what you said. And I know how you said it. And I know why you said it, and how it was meant to be construed.”
And the conversation just kinda petered on out ’round about that time, as there was genuinely not much more either of us could say or do. But at least I’d called her out, and we were on the same page.
Are we on the same page with these sheriffs? Do we know what kind of logically expected outcome we’re looking at here, depending on where we live and who’s name is on the star? If we don’t have solid, dependable answers to these questions, then we need to be working toward them.
All that having been said, these sheriffs do have more power on tap to back off federal overreach than anyone would typically imagine, if they’ve got the gonads and their hearts are in the right place.
Benny House shook the world with his courageous and historic stand against this very type of overreach last year at the Ontero County, New Mexico “Tree Party Rebellion”. If you are unaware of this and what went on there you can enter “Benny House” or “Tree Party” into The Dirty Lowdown’s site search widget and retrieve the articles we did on that whole thing at the time…
Man, you talking about someone with cajones like cannon balls, Benny House is da man! Benny House is the real deal and walked the walk — no, he blazed the trail — for others to follow in these types of situations we’re looking at every day now with these fascist usurpers for whom enough power and taxpayer funding is never enough… every time we acquiesce they come right back for more… and more… and more. These Washington politicians have become like a pool of bloodthirsty pirhannas, and they’re now gnawing the very flesh off our bones in what could only be described as a veritable feeding frenzy….
Sheriff Benny House, Ontero County, New Mexico (CloudCroft)
Hero of the Tree Party Rebellion
I think we’re going to have to get back to community if we’re going to defeat this monster hydra that’s feeding on us now. We’re going to have to work on building “communities” — our own little individual localized areas and the folks we have around us — if we reasonably expect to survive. One individual alone can’t be reasonably expected to accomplish much, and the nation as a whole is just too big and too fractured, too fragmented and too polarized, to ever unite behind a common cause such as this… I don’t believe that could ever happen.
So 300 million is too many, and one is not enough. That leaves us in the position of seeking a practical number somewhere in between which might work: perhaps say a town, or maybe a county… or maybe even a whole state, who knows — “communities” or “groups”, assembled by common principles, directed by common outlooks, and united by common cause.
This leaves these sheriffs in a real sweet spot as the most likely natural leaders of such a peaceful, grassroots rebellion against current and future federal tyranny. We need command structure, communications and control… we need organization, direction, and the force of law on our side. These sheriffs such as Benny House and Tim Mueller come complete with all that built in, and more.
These sheriffs can lead a successful charge against the dragon. I believe that. That’s why I keep building them shrines whenever they come through here… Because I realize just how critical their personal involvement or lack thereof is to the success or failure of our collective enterprise… In fact, I see it as perhaps the single most crucial element in all of this…
If we expect to succeed, we are going to have to start finding ways to work around Washington like Washington’s been working around the Constitution, the Congress, the Bill of Rights, and most importantly, the will of the American People. I’m sure they won’t mind, since they originated the concept and set the precedent…