• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Federal Takeover of Colorado Sheriffs and Police

Augustin

Regular Member
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
337
Location
, ,
"Federal Takeover of Colorado Sheriffs and Police"

I love this forum, but I am really amazed by the inflammatory titles used for some of the threads.

A judge rules that some of the plaintiffs, which happened to be LEOs, had no standing in their official capacities. How is that a take over of the sheriffs and police?

Puhleeeze. Are you really that blind? Take off the horse blinders and get out of the stall for a change. It shouldn’t be hard to see the big 30,000’ picture if you try.

I look at it like a jigsaw puzzle. The more pieces you can assemble the clearer the picture becomes. Each news story is a single puzzle piece. Some of the pieces may not ever fit into place. But many do fit. If you look at just this one article I suppose you might somehow think the title is “inflammatory.”

But doing so will be at your own peril. Keeping yourself ignorant will not stop the country from disintegrating into total tyranny. No amount of cognitive dissonance, normalcy bias, and general apathy can protect even the most unaware of Americans as to what lies in their immediate future.

And if we assemble even a small portion of the big picture, what do we see? America is rapidly becoming a tyrannical, federalized police state. One of the goals of the New World Order global elite is to quietly merge the local police departments into one Federal Police force, and then eventually a world police force.

Below is a couple of videos I recommend everyone watch. They are available to watch for free at youtube.com. Simply go to youtube.com and put the film’s title in the search engine box.

One such video is Alex Jones’ film, “Martial Law 9-11: The Rise of the Police State.”

And a few other videos I recommend you watch are,

“Police State 2000”
"Police State II: The Takeover”
"Police State III: Total Enslavement”
“Police State 4: The Rise Of FEMA”
“TerrorStorm (Second Edition): A History of Government Sponsored Terrorism”
“ENDGAME: Blueprint for Global Enslavement”

A couple of these films have had over 40 million views on you-tube, so understand that they are not some bizarre and unknown conspiracy films. They are as mainstream as many major Hollywood films.

There are two disturbing trends in law enforcement. First, the U.S. military is being used for domestic law enforcement, contrary to law. Secondly, the federal government is taking over the financing, training, and direction of local police, removing the police from local control. The result is that the federalized police have increasingly turned to violent tactics and assaults on people who have not committed any crimes.

Here's how it is happening. A little-known Pentagon program has been quietly militarizing American police forces for years. Well over $4.2 billion worth of equipment has been distributed by the Defense Department to municipal law enforcement agencies, with a record $546 million in 2012 alone. The figures for 2013 haven’t been released yet.

IMPORTANTLY, along with these grants come what is called “COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS” which means the police agencies that are receiving these funds and equipment are signing deals with the Feds to agree to their policies and supervision !!! This sell-out started in 1977 under the “Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977.”

Traditionally, the U.S. has had civilian control of governments at all levels. The 1878 Posse Comitatus Act made it illegal for the US military to act as a domestic police. But the trend now is towards the militarization of law enforcement. The slaughter at Waco was a prime example.

Under the 1981 "Military Cooperation with Law-Enforcement Officials Act," the Department of Defense is supplying the local police with paramilitary training and equipment, especially for SWAT teams, for use against civilians. Many SWAT teams are being trained by former military special operations officers. And the Pentagon has armed many big city police departments with an incredible array of weaponry; full-auto machine guns, long-range .50 caliber sniper rifles, body armor, stun grenades, grenade and OC gas launchers, night vision devices, infrared (invisible) lasers, thermal imagers, spike strips, hi-tech vehicle arrestors (i.e., handheld “guns” that can shut down a running vehicle’s electronics bringing it to a stop), armored personal carriers, and even surveillance drones.

These militarized SWAT teams love to execute their warrants by breaking into homes in the dead of night, breaking down doors to surprise the sleeping residents. The house gets trashed, the dog probably is killed, and if they don't find any drugs, they leave without any apology or restitution. No records are kept on the number of innocent people brutalized and shot by paramilitary police units. And the police are also increasingly practicing asset forfeiture and seizure, where the raiders keep the loot. This is modern day piracy.

If federalization continues to proceed, it won't be long before the police will be taken completely out of local control. It won’t matter if their arm patches stay the same saying they are from such and such jurisdiction, their funding will come from federal funds and asset seizures, and their allegiance will be to the Feds, not to their town or county. They will not longer be local police, but units of a federal police force allied with the U.S. military.

We are not yet a national military police state, but America is well down that path, and I seriously doubt it can be stopped.

AUGustin
 
Last edited:

SteveInCO

Regular Member
Joined
May 3, 2013
Messages
297
Location
El Paso County, Colorado
Geez, all this text and you still didn't answer the man's question. Just in case you have forgotten it, it is "A judge rules that some of the plaintiffs, which happened to be LEOs, had no standing in their official capacities. How is that a take over of the sheriffs and police?" I'm interested in hearing the answer to that question, too. Maybe it was the fact that those sheriffs voluntarily filed a lawsuit that makes it a "takeover".

He's too busy gulping the Alex Jones Koolaid to realize he's babbling incessantly about nothing relevant.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
A citizen beats the rap because the law is bad does not mean that the law is struck down. The citizen must be convicted under the bad law and have a appeals process that opines that the law is bad and the citizen should have never been convicted in the first place. Cops can arrest for anything and every thing, minor inconvience in the eyes of the state.

Getting convicted can be the hard part in the eyes of the state. I suspect that DAs, except maybe Denver DAs, will not prosecute "perps" cuz the law(s) just may get ruled as unconstitutional. The laws are nothing more than a tool to intimidate the meek of heart. Someone said it, if all the sheriffs know and say it is unconstitutional then the legislature and the executive knew it too.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
LEA are not obligated to enforce most laws, unless the laws specically state that they must be enforced. Arrest is completely at the discretion of the police. Unless a judge steps in and gives an court order for arrest. Police cannot enforce laws that do not exist.

Not sure how it is on Primus's military post. :lol:

BTW LEOSA does not give military police any civilian police powers. NONE! NADA! The recent addition of military police into it was not to negate posse comitatus.

Must be frustrating for those wishing to be a real cop.
 
Last edited:

Dario

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2013
Messages
204
Location
Larimer County, CO
Good news is if you do you might get so upset (based on your current lack of ability to deal with an opposing view) that you'll be able to claim depression or some other illness and get a medical marijuana card. It'll then be legal for you. Your welcome.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Although getting a MMC technically forfeits the 2nd amendment since Marijuana is considered a "controlled substance" by federal law.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
LEA are not obligated to enforce most laws, unless the laws specically state that they must be enforced. Arrest is completely at the discretion of the police. Unless a judge steps in and gives an court order for arrest. Police cannot enforce laws that do not exist.

Not sure how it is on Primus's military post. :lol:

BTW LEOSA does not give military police any civilian police powers. NONE! NADA! The recent addition of military police into it was not to negate posse comitatus.

Must be frustrating for those wishing to be a real cop.

Wait... you think I'm a mud puppy? (Mp) Is that your idis with me? For the record I'm infantry in military and a full time police officer. Not a deputy not a mall cop not a part time or reserve cop on a reservation or any other idea you may have. Just a regular police officer in a large city. No more no less

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

bomber

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
499
Location
, ,
First.... good refutation. "Marijuana should be legal so your wrong". Go to the marijuana thread its been discussed to death over there and put much better then yourself.

Second if you think what I said was me being a dick then your in for a surprise if you read the other threads and some actual d**** responses guys post. Good news is if you do you might get so upset (based on your current lack of ability to deal with an opposing view) that you'll be able to claim depression or some other illness and get a medical marijuana card. It'll then be legal for you. Your welcome.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Idiot proof logic!

The nice thing about discussing a topic with someone like you is that the truth becomes self evident so quickly that there is no danger that a reasoned person will buy the nonsense you are spewing. It takes little effort to make my point because you handle that quite well.

And you cement a lot of people's perception of today's police.

Congrats, you're being very productive today.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Idiot proof logic!

The nice thing about discussing a topic with someone like you is that the truth becomes self evident so quickly that there is no danger that a reasoned person will buy the nonsense you are spewing. It takes little effort to make my point because you handle that quite well.

And you cement a lot of people's perception of today's police.

Congrats, you're being very productive today.

Did u have something productive to add to the conversation besides a bash? At least others were attempting to discuss the topic and make assertions other then about a person.

You seem to be also bashing a lot of other guys in this thread that have a similar belief as I do. I guess we are unreasoned.

So be it its your opinion.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

bomber

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
499
Location
, ,
Did u have something productive to add to the conversation besides a bash? At least others were attempting to discuss the topic and make assertions other then about a person.

You seem to be also bashing a lot of other guys in this thread that have a similar belief as I do. I guess we are unreasoned.

So be it its your opinion.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I did. You ignored it and instead initiated a veiled attack.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
I did. You ignored it and instead initiated a veiled attack.

?

Throw me a bone here. What did I ignore? The part where you say idio proof logic? The part where you say "the truth" comes out from me so easy and fast you don't need to refute because any person with reason will disregard me? Or is it the part where you bash all leos and say I'm an example of why guys dislike them?

Please explain what I ignored and further how any of that is productive to the conversation.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

bomber

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
499
Location
, ,
?

Throw me a bone here. What did I ignore? The part where you say idio proof logic? The part where you say "the truth" comes out from me so easy and fast you don't need to refute because any person with reason will disregard me? Or is it the part where you bash all leos and say I'm an example of why guys dislike them?

Please explain what I ignored and further how any of that is productive to the conversation.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

You ignored the point about marijuana prohibition being in immoral law in a society that allows alcohol and which banned this harmless substance for business reasons and not public safety reasons. You ignored the point about the lives that prohibition and enforcement has ruined. You ignored the part about the courts refusing to strike down the immoral law.

And then you told Marshaul that if he was so upset about it, he could always get a red card and smoke his way out of the bad feelings.

Typical cop, picking and choosing what happened so that he can make the citizen look like the bad guy.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
You ignored the point about marijuana prohibition being in immoral law in a society that allows alcohol and which banned this harmless substance for business reasons and not public safety reasons. You ignored the point about the lives that prohibition and enforcement has ruined. You ignored the part about the courts refusing to strike down the immoral law.

And then you told Marshaul that if he was so upset about it, he could always get a red card and smoke his way out of the bad feelings.

Typical cop, picking and choosing what happened so that he can make the citizen look like the bad guy.

I apologize for not realizing you were referring to a post that was on a different page and from a previous time. I assumed you were referring to the bash you threw out there.

And I did respond in the sane post I responded to marshal in. I basically said go to the weed thread going on its been beat to death over there. You precious post basically just said its immoral because you said so. Period. I'll say again if u want to debate marijuana go to that thread. This thread was about the supposed overtaking of a PD (which was completely untrue as already pointed out by a different poster).

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
And for the record.. I was referring to YOU smoking if you were so upset by my post. I said that since YOU said I was being a d*** (for no reason). While marshaul did agree with you, you were the one who said it. I understand the way I quoted the post only he came up when I responded but I was wholely towards you since you were so upset you had to resort to name calling.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

bomber

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
499
Location
, ,
I apologize for not realizing you were referring to a post that was on a different page and from a previous time. I assumed you were referring to the bash you threw out there.

And I did respond in the sane post I responded to marshal in. I basically said go to the weed thread going on its been beat to death over there. You precious post basically just said its immoral because you said so. Period. I'll say again if u want to debate marijuana go to that thread. This thread was about the supposed overtaking of a PD (which was completely untrue as already pointed out by a different poster).

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

You brought up this issue of police following laws that were unjust. I was using marijuana laws as an example. MMJ laws are a perfect example of how you are wrong. There is no need to beat the issue of MMJ legalization to death here, but the fact remains that it is an unjust law, enforced almost universally by leo's without question, the enforcement of which harms more lives and liberty than the subject of the law itself, upheld by the courts and therefor the perfect example of where your logic is wrong.

And for the second time instead of simply addressing that, you point to a different thread.

And yes, you are a kind of a d***. They way you condescend and treat people who don't agree with you in this thread is an example of that. Go back and reread the thread and see where the hostilities started. They started with you.

Mull that over in your little head before u make any more cracks. Thanks.

Your statement that I'm upset and that I should go get a red card to deal with it is not exactly helping your case.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
You ignored the point about marijuana prohibition being in immoral law in a society that allows alcohol and which banned this harmless substance for business reasons and not public safety reasons. You ignored the point about the lives that prohibition and enforcement has ruined. You ignored the part about the courts refusing to strike down the immoral law.

And then you told Marshaul that if he was so upset about it, he could always get a red card and smoke his way out of the bad feelings.

Typical cop, picking and choosing what happened so that he can make the citizen look like the bad guy.

HEY! Don't lump all police in with this guy, I have my doubts about his claims to begin with. I know of no other cops, outside of jailers, mall cops, security guards, and basic wannabes that are so intent upon proving their authority on the internet.
 

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Wait... you think I'm a mud puppy? (Mp) Is that your idis with me? For the record I'm infantry in military and a full time police officer. Not a deputy not a mall cop not a part time or reserve cop on a reservation or any other idea you may have. Just a regular police officer in a large city. No more no less

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Well, I think we're free to determine some of what you are on merit.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
For some reason app won't let me quote what u said bomber.... but the whole premise you have is that marijuana laws are immoral and wrong. You therefore based on this incorrect assumption/belief (its no more then that) that anyone who does agree and does enforce it is bad.

Again... go to the other thread where its been discussed on both sides pretty thoroughly. You'll also see that I don't really care about marijuana on a personal level (since your so intent on making it personal). I've even stated I've let plenty of guys go with small amounts of it.

Again I'm no more condescending or a d**** then anyone else on this forum. I've still yet to call you names my friend.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
You certainly are. Your also free to be wrong in your assumptions and biases. Either way I must admit it doesn't bother me remotely.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Yes it does. Directly. You are protected here, not respected here. I know it, you know it, and it eats you alive.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Yes it does. Directly. You are protected here, not respected here. I know it, you know it, and it eats you alive.

Lol thank you I needed a laugh today from all the other serious issues going on.

I'm assuming this was a joke right? I mean maybe the first half but then you threw the "eats you alive" bit. A little too dramatic for my taste.

While I will admit that there are certain "fence sitters" that I care how they view myself and my profession, you are not one of them. You have made it clear how you feel and I know I will never change that. So I move on to better thongs to worry about.

Finally its sad you can't respect another person just on the grounds they are human like you and are apart of society. I am no evil doer nor criminal nor outcast. I've never harmed you or anyone else here in anyway. Do u have to agree with me? No not remotely. But to blatantly not respect me (purely as a person) then that's reflects your character not mine.

There are a few guys on here that have direct opposing views that I do on politics (which is what this is). Its called respectfully disagreeing.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Top