Cops aren’t in charge of what laws are right and what laws are wrong.
The reason I posted this separately from other gun related stuff is that it related to sheriffs.
I’ve been doing research on the legal status of sheriffs and the posse comitatus. Sheriffs have wide latitude in these matters. They are considered independent of the rest of the law enforcement agencies because they are elected.
This is not the first time the sheriffs have taken the lead. I seem to remember a big to-do a few years back in Virginia, where the state legislature tried to limit what guns could be owned. Nearly all sheriffs said they would defend the people against any attempt to disarm them.
Here in New Hampshire I remember at least one sheriff making similar statements, wrt to federal agents trying to disarm residents here… if I remember correctly he stated that he would arrest any federal agents whose mission was to disarm the populace.
This will not be the last time we see sheriffs leading the way.
This should clarify what I was trying to say above.
“As mentioned in the beginning of this article there are two characteristics
that distinguish the Office of Sheriff. The second characteristic that sets
the sheriff’s office apart from other law enforcement agencies is its direct
accountability to citizens through the election of the Sheriff. The Office of
Sheriff is not a department of county government, it is the independent
office through which the Sheriff exercises the powers of the public trust.
No individual or small group hires or fires the Sheriff, or has the authority
to interfere with the operations of the office. Elected sheriffs are accountable
directly to the constitution of their state, the United States Constitution,
statutes, and the citizens of their county.”
I don’t know how accurate this article is… it covers the powers of the sheriff, including
power over federal agents, including the President of the United States, within the
jurisdiction of the sheriff.
From April 18, 2016, The Center for Public Integrity
“Mack first made it to the national stage in 1996 as a sheriff from Arizona,
when he and a sheriff from Montana challenged a provision of the Brady
Handgun Violence Prevention Act before the U.S. Supreme Court. Using
attorneys subsidized by the National Rifle Association, they argued it
was unconstitutional for the federal government to require local chief
law enforcement officers to run background checks on prospective
gun buyers — and won, in a 5-4
ruling that struck down that provision of the act.”