Peyman's announcement is a response to planned federal proposals on gun control, which will be announced by Joe Biden on Tuesday.
Asked by reporters if he'd be acting more like a judge than a law-enforcement officer, the sheriff responded that he has "a team of attorneys to step up with me if necessary to be sure the Second Amendment is upheld."
Well, one of the most powerful officials in any county or parish is the Sheriff. For years they were referred to as the "High Sheriff." Along with constables the sheriff has great authority. The only controls on him are state and local constitutions and codes. He can operate under the 10th Amendment and fight the fed till hell freezes over....or until he is not re-elected.
@dances-weebles Look, weebles, did you ever consider that this sheriff is "one of them?" Did you consider why these folks elected him? I know every one of the last three sheriffs in my county. One lives in my community, one is a distant cousin to my wife, and the other is a Marine vet like me...and we talk frequently at the courthouse. Each of these men is "one of us." That's why they are elected. We know them and they know us...and they are all long time law enforcement professionals.
Here! Here! KY is a solid Republican state. After reading today that Ohio is 60%+ gimmedat class I might consider moving elsewhere. I am tired of supporting that welfare trash. If there are more Sheriffs like this guy, they need to start coming forward as well. Let Comrade Soetoro and Comrade Biden know there are people who will stand up to their evil plans.
The Constitution is the supreme law of the land. He's not committing a crime if he won't enforce a bill that is in direct conflict with it. In fact, it should be a crime to enforce an unconstitutional bill.
Of course it is not his job to determine what is constitutional now is it? It is his job to enforce the laws as they are written. If the laws are found to be unconstitutional then they are not to be enforced. Until then he is supposed to enforce the laws that exist. At no time is this man ever entitled to determine which laws he wants to enforce.
@PNWest Since the supreme law of the land absolutely bans any infringement upon the people's inalienable right to arms, it is self-evident that any attempt to so infringe is "unconstitutional" - and therefore against the law. The sheriff is bound by his oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution from all enemies, foreign AND domestic.
The problem with his statement is that he would not uphold laws that "he" deems to be unconstitutional. With thinking like this and the way the constitution could be interpreted differently by every person on the planet, this is a recipe for disaster. I am willing to be that the supporters of this wouldn't be praising him, if he believed that guns should be outlawed because that is how he interpreted the constitution. You dont like him because he is doing what he believes is right, you like him because he believes what you believe. This argument has very little to do with the constitution by the way.
"The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" The meaning and intent is self-evident. It is not possible for someone to reasonably claim that it means that "guns should be outlawed". It really is that simple.
@bambi33 - Doesn't a county sherrif make an oath to uphold and enforce the law? I don't think there's anything in those county sherrif oaths of office about defending the constitution. You may have sherrifs confused with other elected officials. In any case, upholding and enforcing existing laws does not give him the right to interpret which laws are constitutional. I do believe that's above his pay grade. And BTW, sure wish you'd stop posting "It really is that simple." It makes you sound simple, indeed.
@Denizen_Kate You are incorrect. All public officials (federal, state, and county) are required by law to sign an oath or affirmation that includes the declaration "I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic". Since the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it supersedes all other laws in direct conflict with it. Even the Supreme Court determined "that an act of the legislature, repugnant to the constitution, is void.", and that "This... is... is... to be considered by this court as one of the fundamental principles of our society." [Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137]
BTW, I sure wish you would educate yourself so that you can actually comprehend the simple basic concepts and principles you seem so eager to talk about. Then you wouldn't aggravate everyone with having to constantly explain 3rd-grade civics.
@bambi33 - Sorry about that. I never meant to be an aggravation to anyone, especially not to you, Bambi. I await your next "It really is that simple" pontification with great eagerness. I still maintain that interpreting the constitutionality of a law is above the pay grade of the average county sheriff (look, I even spelled it correctly this time :), but unlike some, I can admit when I'm wrong. I did a little research and it seems that though it differs from one county to another, the oath of office for a sheriff often includes the bit about upholding the constitution. I stand corrected.
I didn't pick a choice. No need to. This Sheriff knows what the Westboro Baptists know. Get outrageous. The media will make you famous. He'll get away with it until the Mayor's kid gets shot and then that's the end of that.
@bambi33 I'm not implying any such thing. I'm simply saying that disobeying the law is popular until such time as someone is negatively impacted by that disobedience and that someone happens to be someone who can fire that sheriff and that's exactly what will happen.
The state is in charge not the federal government. All congress and the president need to do is read the ultimate law of the land "The Consistution of the United States of America". Need I say more. Thank God for the people who stand up for the Consistution.
He's merely the sheriff. The decision about which laws to rebuff isn't his. That lies in the domain of the district or county attorney. And that decision will be quite a long time coming since nobody has introduced a law to begin the extremely difficult and lengthy process to repeal the 2nd amendment.
Well, Sheriff Arpaio in Arizona is getting up in years and may not be around much longer. If there's a national quota for flashy-but-stupid law enforcement, I'd vote for this guy to take Sheriff Joe's place.
Thank God! I am so glad this sheriff is standing up to this administration. They are bullies who act like royalty. AARP, coke, GE, etc... all allowed this administration to bully them into line but this sheriff and other brave americans will stand up to them.
@marine1 There is a difference in exercising common sense and defying the law, but maybe you define common sense differently than I do. I once met a thief who thought common sense meant "whatever he could get a way with".