• 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.

Local LEO's enforcing federal law? Allowed or not?

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Ww what were the charges you would enforce? As asked was there a specific statute that alllowes you enforce said laws? We are GIVEN power by the laws themselves. Maybe your state had a clause that allowed that. I won't even ask for a cite because you won't provide one.

So you would drop a guy off for detention and the prosecutor would file charges? What? You wouldn't file charges? You guys have a prosecutor on at 3am? Or did you PD have operating hrs?

And finally... you can only hold someone on an out of state warrant if you have an intradition agreement. For example I had a girl stopped a few months ago. She had a hit for a warrant from RI. It was a bogus drunk in public charge. Only a misdemeanor. It said right o the Ncics hit that they would NOT come get her because it was a misdemeanor. So she got kicked loose. Some states don't have agreements on certain warrants. On the flip side I have locked a guy up on an out of state warrant. He was a bail jumper from Georgia I believe. It wasn't Georgia warrant that gave me power it was my states version and charge. It was a a complete separate charge and warrant from my state that gave me power to arrest him. But that charge was based on him fleeing Georgia.



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Statutes does not tell WHO to enforce the laws, in most cases, they just state what is illegal. And in some cases such as concealed carry exceptions to what is illegal. If the law had to spell out WHO enforced the law, then no laws would be enforced.

Have you seen anything in the BOR 4th or 5th amendment that mentions police?

Mass cannot charge a person with a act in Georgia! No matter what law they enact, it is unconstitutional. They can arrest and hold on federal and constitutional authority. So again without federal stepping in no arrest or detention.

Bounty hunters are a classic example, their power to retrieve a jumper in another state is based on a FEDERAL SCOTUS decision. The states only enact laws what they can't do, and the standards they have to meet, not what they can do. That is not the purpose of laws.

Also the military is blocked from enforcing civilian local, state, and federal law by a law. Posse Comitatus Act, making illegal for active duty soldiers to act as police except under exceptions spelled out in the law. For a law to have a exception it would have to be a law in the first place.
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Statutes does not tell WHO to enforce the laws, in most cases, they just state what is illegal. And in some cases such as concealed carry exceptions to what is illegal. If the law had to spell out WHO enforced the law, then no laws would be enforced.

Have you seen anything in the BOR 4th or 5th amendment that mentions police?

Mass cannot charge a person with a act in Georgia! No matter what law they enact, it is unconstitutional. They can arrest and hold on federal and constitutional authority. So again without federal stepping in no arrest or detention.

Bounty hunters are a classic example, their power to retrieve a jumper in another state is based on a FEDERAL SCOTUS decision. The states only enact laws what they can't do, and the standards they have to meet, not what they can do. That is not the purpose of laws.

Also the military is blocked from enforcing civilian local, state, and federal law by a law. Posse Comitatus Act, making illegal for active duty soldiers to act as police except under exceptions spelled out in the law. For a law to have a exception it would have to be a law in the first place.

I'll loom up the exact charge that was used on that warrant and I'll post it as a cite.

And I hate to say it but statutes do spell out our exact police powers. I'll also post that as a cite.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
I'll loom up the exact charge that was used on that warrant and I'll post it as a cite.

And I hate to say it but statutes do spell out our exact police powers. I'll also post that as a cite.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

The charge on the warrant has nothing to do with it, it has to do with the constitution of the US. A charge in Georgia means diddly without the authority provided by the constitution to hold that person for a charge in another state. YOUR state cannot prosecute, and and Georgia has to do the leg work for the prisoner to be turned over to them.

AGAIN MASS cannot prosecute for a crime committed in another state! They can only detain that person until due process is completed to hand them over to Georgia authorities. Are you sure you attended the academy?
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
PS . .. pretty sure I spelt intradition wrong. Its like extradition which is out of country. Intradition is between states in the country.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
No such word, except in the "Urban Dictionary." And, that "definition" does not jive with what you claim.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
No such word, except in the "Urban Dictionary." And, that "definition" does not jive with what you claim.

I believe the word should be rendition, but for years it has been called extradition between states. He still lacks a basic understanding of common law, and the constitution that every officer needs to have to perform their job.

Or the schools, and Police academies in Ma are completely incompetent.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Either post to topic or kick rocks. Yet another good thread will be derailed by personal attacks. This isn't complicated if you have opinion A cite a damn source and explain. If you believe its false..... explain and cite

I swear its becoming harder and harder to keep a thread from going down the tubes.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
...Why in the he!! would sheriffs be refusing to enforce federal laws?...
How about these reasons (generally):
1) Because they don't have jurisdiction
2) Because they don't have a duty to enforce it
2) Because their state law doesn't mandate it (they don't have a parallel law)

The Feds can't pass a law which state/local authorities must enforce. Have you ever heard that before?

Finally, the reason why Sheriff's would "refuse to enforce" Federal law is because they don't want to tell you that they don't have the authority to do so.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
How about these reasons (generally):
1) Because they don't have jurisdiction
2) Because they don't have a duty to enforce it
2) Because their state law doesn't mandate it (they don't have a parallel law)

The Feds can't pass a law which state/local authorities must enforce. Have you ever heard that before?

Finally, the reason why Sheriff's would "refuse to enforce" Federal law is because they don't want to tell you that they don't have the authority to do so.

If they don't have jurisdiction they don't have to refuse! Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
How about these reasons (generally):
1) Because they don't have jurisdiction
2) Because they don't have a duty to enforce it
2) Because their state law doesn't mandate it (they don't have a parallel law)

The Feds can't pass a law which state/local authorities must enforce. Have you ever heard that before?

Finally, the reason why Sheriff's would "refuse to enforce" Federal law is because they don't want to tell you that they don't have the authority to do so.

I'm thinking in agreeing with you BB but I'm going to look for some cites to help explain to the op.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,069
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
If they don't have jurisdiction they don't have to refuse! Duhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
Here, I'll make it larger so you understand: because they don't want to tell you that they don't have the authority to do so.

Just what do the words "jurisdiction" and "authority" mean in your world?
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
I don't need a cite! If there is a law on the books it is the LEO's job to enforce it? Why don't YOU provide a cite that it is illegal for the officer to enforce the law?

Again if it is not illegal it is legal, most people with intelligence get that, it only has been discussed on this board countless times.

Please provide the law for the bold?

you have been here long enough to know that when you make a claim, it is up to YOU to back it up. It is insulting to the rest of members to expect them to do your due diligence for you.
:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Here, I'll make it larger so you understand: because they don't want to tell you that they don't have the authority to do so.

Just what do the words "jurisdiction" and "authority" mean in your world?

That is the most stupid thing I have heard yet! If they don't have the authority they don't have to make the comment. Duhhhhhhhhhh!
 

self preservation

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,036
Location
Owingsville,KY
Again what is not illegal is legal, there are no cites for what does not exist, only a idiot would think otherwise. :lol:

It wasn't illegal for that LEO to post anti-OC crap on his Facebook page either, but that didn't stop you from hounding the hell out of me to provide a cite/source that didn't exist. Now maybe you understand the frustration I felt that day when you insisted that I provide proof that didn't exist to my claim, then called me a liar when I couldn't do it.
 
Top