|
|
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Washington Sheriffs: Do Your Job and Enforce the Law
Submitted by:
David Williamson
Website: http://constitutionnetwork.com
|
There
are 2 comments
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
County sheriffs are elected to enforce laws adopted through the legislative process and ballot box, no matter if they like them. Sheriffs are not elected to write laws, nor prosecute them. And they’re certainly not elected to act like judges with badges, deciding by fiat which laws to uphold or ignore. That’s why Washington residents should be distressed by a growing parade of sheriffs who’ve said they won’t enforce Initiative 1639, the gun-safety measure ratified by 59 percent of voters in the Nov. 6 election. |
| Comment by:
Stripeseven
(2/11/2019)
|
Hopefully they will not violate [Their oath of office] by being pressured into enforcing any unconstitutional provision, law or executive order.”
The Sheriffs have unwavering Loyalty to the Original Constitution.
|
| Comment by:
jac
(2/11/2019)
|
These men took an oath to enforce the constitution as all LEO and military do. It is not a matter of like or dislike the law. The law is unconstitutional and that is why they won't enforce it.
Politicians also take an oath to enforce the constitution, but we all know how ethical many politicians are. |
|
|
| QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
| No kingdom can be secured otherwise than by arming the people. The possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave. He, who has nothing, and who himself belongs to another, must be defended by him, whose property he is, and needs no arms. But he, who thinks he is his own master, and has what he can call his own, ought to have arms to defend himself, and what he possesses; else he lives precariously, and at discretion. — James Burgh, Political Disquisitions: Or, an Enquiry into Public Errors, Defects, and Abuses [London, 1774-1775]. |
|
|
