Federal Takeover of Colorado Sheriffs and Police

[WalkingWolf]

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

I agree, he is trying way to hard to exert authority he does not have.

 

[Primus]

I agree, he is trying way to hard to exert authority he does not have.

Your right walking wolf... your a detective.... you nailed me I confess. My life goal is to make you believe everything I say and to be the authority over you. I wish to dominate and control you and everyone on this site. Resistance is futile!

Now for those that live on this planet and in reality.... above was a joke.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[WalkingWolf]

Your right walking wolf... your a detective.... you nailed me I confess. My life goal is to make you believe everything I say and to be the authority over you. I wish to dominate and control you and everyone on this site. Resistance is futile!

Now for those that live on this planet and in reality.... above was a joke.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Yea right! :lol: clearly you are upset because members are not falling at your feet. Your post above proves it.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

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.

What could possibly lead you to believe I was joking?

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.

You are in no position to determine what my distaste for you is based on or assign motive to anything I believe OTHER than on exactly what I've stated. I'm articulate enough I do not need you interpreting my posts, thank you. Take my posts at face value. You are not obligated to accept them, but you are not going to get by taking them out of context.

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

.

 

[Fuller Malarkey]

Your right walking wolf... your a detective.... you nailed me I confess. My life goal is to make you believe everything I say and to be the authority over you. I wish to dominate and control you and everyone on this site. Resistance is futile!

Now for those that live on this planet and in reality.... above was a joke.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

What? The humor associated with those struggling with Aspergers Syndrome?

 

[Primus]

Yea right! :lol: clearly you are upset because members are not falling at your feet. Your post above proves it.

Wolf I agreed with you I need total submission and for people to just fall at my feet. Your just helping my cause by continually making things about me.

Lol I feel like I'm reinforcing the idea of a Christmas Grinch or the boogeyman to a child.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Dario]

Wolf I agreed with you I need total submission and for people to just fall at my feet. Your just helping my cause by continually making things about me.

Lol I feel like I'm reinforcing the idea of a Christmas Grinch or the boogeyman to a child.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

I'm just happy to see a real pro2A LEO that is vocal about it rather than one that says he is on the street but in the next breath asks for my papers! Merry Christmas

 

[bomber]

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

If you understand how MMJ came to be outlawed, how can you assert that the law is moral and right? In a society that hypocritically outlaws a plant that has never directly killed anyone but promotes alcohol consumption at every turn when alcohol has directly killed hundreds of thousands since the end of Prohibition, how can you assert that MMJ laws are anything but immoral?

It's not about how you feel about it personally. It's about arresting and charging people for possessing a plant that is known to be essentially harmless. So you let some small time people go. Have you ever used suspicion of possession of mmj as reasonable suspicion in order to detain and search someone for other crimes? Then you have perpetuated the problem with this bogus and immoral law.

The road to tyranny is paved with people like you who are just doing their job. We have the highest prison population in the world, and a large portion of those prisoners are in jail for doing nothing other than intoxicating their own bodies with substances that we have arbitrarily called "illegal". That is tyranny. And it keeps happening because police on the street continue to enforce laws without questioning whether or not they should.

 

[bomber]

This one is for you Primus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOsN-P5abVg

According to your logic, your answer is "Yes, I will do what I'm told, it's not up to me to refuse orders that are immoral."

 

[Primus]

If you understand how MMJ came to be outlawed, how can you assert that the law is moral and right? In a society that hypocritically outlaws a plant that has never directly killed anyone but promotes alcohol consumption at every turn when alcohol has directly killed hundreds of thousands since the end of Prohibition, how can you assert that MMJ laws are anything but immoral?

It's not about how you feel about it personally. It's about arresting and charging people for possessing a plant that is known to be essentially harmless. So you let some small time people go. Have you ever used suspicion of possession of mmj as reasonable suspicion in order to detain and search someone for other crimes? Then you have perpetuated the problem with this bogus and immoral law.

The road to tyranny is paved with people like you who are just doing their job. We have the highest prison population in the world, and a large portion of those prisoners are in jail for doing nothing other than intoxicating their own bodies with substances that we have arbitrarily called "illegal". That is tyranny. And it keeps happening because police on the street continue to enforce laws without questioning whether or not they should.

As I said go to the marijuana thread and debate everyone over there as to the merits of it being a just law or immoral.

I've run into your theory many times before. You want me to disregard the law when you think its appropriate. When you feel I should to help you out. If I don't then I'm every name on the book. If I did disregard other laws that may protect you then you'd also be wanting to string me up. So its not really that you believe I should disregard the law its I should just do whatever you like and want. How about this you should just realize we do have a job to do. If you don't like it then you have the power to vote and change it and we'll do it different. To just tell me not to do my job (even when I don't agree with it) and then attack me and say its my fault for doing it is lazy. Follow the constitution and the ways it sets up to change laws. I don't recall it saying leos on the ground can just disregard any law they don't like. I already made it clear that if it was something clearly in violation of the constitution it won't happen. For example, a local town administrator wanted to enforce our statute that governs the storage of firearms. Meaning he wanted police to just walk into your house and make sure your gun is secured. Well he asked the local PD for advice and of it was legal. Guess what the PD told him? To kick rocks and that we follow the Constitution.

Do u realize how backwards that is? Guys don't trust us hate us even, want us to have no powers, yet you want us to have direct control over how we interpret laws on the street? Just piss on case law and statutes that we have to follow? You really want us having that power? I certainly don't want it. I'm happy with discretion I have because I use it to help people. Discretion is not total disregard for a law.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Primus]

This one is for you Primus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOsN-P5abVg

According to your logic, your answer is "Yes, I will do what I'm told, it's not up to me to refuse orders that are immoral."

Actually just said something I wouldn't do and answered your question. Also wouldn't participate in gun confiscation. I know that's not what u want to hear because you already have a preconceived notion of who u think I am and how I operate.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Dario]

This one is for you Primus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOsN-P5abVg

According to your logic, your answer is "Yes, I will do what I'm told, it's not up to me to refuse orders that are immoral."

The word "purge" should also be in the back mind of every person in authority.

 

[Augustin]

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

“Argumentum ad hominem” is a Latin term that means “to the man” or “against the man.” Often when someone is confronted with a difficult or painful truth they will attack the messenger rather the message itself. This is done to put the focus on the arguer as a distraction from the issues that matter. This is what you have done to me. If you have a problem with Alex Jones' videos, why not address those issues directly, rather than engaging in an ad hominem attack on me personally?

When I read words like yours - stating that the emerging national police state is irrelevant - it makes me wonder just WHO you are. To explain, the Federal government routinely hires internet trolls, shills to monitor chat rooms, disrupt article comment sections. Criticizing Alex Jones, who has probably done more for the liberty movement than any other single man, makes me wonder if you are nothing more than a paid lackey hired by the government or some international organization to sway and ultimately control public opinion. Just saying....

For the record, I’m not much of a fan of Alex Jones, and I haven’t listened to his radio show for something like 9 or 10 years now. But I do recommend his documentary films, especially for those people who are new to the liberty movement and those ignorant of the New World Order.

I do, however, believe that listening to certain talk radio shows is probably the very best way to get informed and to wake up to the dangers we as Americans are facing.

My all time favorite talk show host is Steve Quayle. Unfortunately, after being on the air for 16 years, he has discontinued his own radio show, but he still does broadcasts on other shows. When he does come on a guest, he always posts a notice on his website ahead of time – so you can watch this site for such announcements.

http://stevequayle.com/

The main talk radio show I recommend is called “The Hagmann and Hagmann Report Nightly Radio Show.” You can listen live Monday through Friday from 6:00 to 9:00 PM. Or there are many archived broadcasts available on podcast.

http://www.homelandsecurityus.com/

Click on the “Hagmann and Hagmann Recent Broadcast” box and then the “Special Guests Show Archive” box. There you will find many MP3 podcast from past shows. Look for those past shows which feature Steve Quayle, Pastor David Lankford, Nathan Leal, financial insider “V”, and Tom Horn.

As for Alex Jones, it is true that The Alex Jones Show is the number one internet radio show in the world (reaching approximately 15 million people each week). And his show is very informative and has awoken many people, undoubtedly more than any other talk show. In addition to students, working stiffs, and retirees, many high-level people in government, military, banking, and business listen to Jones on a regular basis. And most foreign military intelligence agencies have agents assigned to keep abreast of Jones’ intell. The best part of the show is the daily interviews with a wide range of people from government, current and retired military, business, media, and entertainment, including activists, political analysts, economists, doctors, scientists, and people from all walks of life all around the world.

All that said, I only reluctantly recommend the Alex Jones Show because Alex, while he is a brilliant person who is very analytical, witty, swift, highly motivated, tireless, and has an incredible memory, the show is rather torturous to listen to. The commercials are numerous and monotonous. And Jones’s overbearing disposition and nasty temper is legendary. He rants and raves, screams and yells, cuts his callers off, and is basically a big time loudmouth. This is NOT good entertainment. It can be very unpleasant to listen to.

Still, listening to Alex Jones is one of the best ways I know of to get woken up in a short amount of time. His films are another matter, though. They are professionally produced and lack all of the aforementioned problems with his radio show. I highly recommend ALL of his fine films.

Also, I’d advise people NOT to allow Alex to lull them into a false sense of security. For years Alex has espoused the idea that if fellow patriots take a bold stance for liberty against the enemies of freedom they will stave off tyranny and save the Republic. I completely disagree. The New World Order is foretold in the Bible and will come to be on an exact timeline set by God himself. It is impossible for man or his militias to delay or stop it. Alex Jones’ “answer to 1984 is 1776” would have a better chance of working if it were 1984. Buts it’s now late 2013. It is far too late for political change. All out preparedness, survivalism, and strategic relocation are the only practical solutions at this late point in the history of America.

AUGustin

 

[Augustin]

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".

I did answer his question. I pointed out that this court decision was just one small piece of the bigger picture. That by itself, it most certainly doesn't constitute a Federal takeover of local police, but it is an attempt by the Federal government to undermine the state sheriff's authority and let them know who is the real boss.

Similar to the war on drugs and the war on terror, there is an ongoing and long-standing war on freedom. This court decision is akin to just one single bullet being fired in a war with thousands of bullets.

A couple of other of these bullets that were shot in Colorado are the Columbine school shooting and the Aurora movie theater shooting rampage. These were both false flag Manchurian candidate events, all staged by the shadow government (using mind control and psychotropic drugs) which has much to gain from gun control legislation to advance the subversion of the U.S. Republic and establish a New World Order police state. if it wasn't for these two staged events, the Colorado gun legislation that the sheriffs are suing over would have never been passed. The Gabrielle Gifford’s attempted assassination, the Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre, the recent Navy Base shooting, and others were also staged shootings by the shadow government. It is highly likely that they will stage more of these tragedies to further their evil agenda.

The gun-grabbing globalists are far too committed and powerful to back off and abandon their disarmament agenda, and liberty loving patriotic American citizens and those in military and law enforcement who take their oaths to defend the Constitution seriously (LIKE THESE 64 SHERIFFS) will likewise never surrender. The inevitable result of this standoff will be a major armed conflict – the second American Revolution.

We are standing at a crossroads - freedom indeed lies in the balance. If we sit idle by while the government continues to chip away at our liberty with court decisions like the one at issue here, we will surely loose the battle.

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

AUGustin

 

[bomber]

As I said go to the marijuana thread and debate everyone over there as to the merits of it being a just law or immoral.

I've run into your theory many times before. You want me to disregard the law when you think its appropriate. When you feel I should to help you out. If I don't then I'm every name on the book. If I did disregard other laws that may protect you then you'd also be wanting to string me up. So its not really that you believe I should disregard the law its I should just do whatever you like and want. How about this you should just realize we do have a job to do. If you don't like it then you have the power to vote and change it and we'll do it different. To just tell me not to do my job (even when I don't agree with it) and then attack me and say its my fault for doing it is lazy. Follow the constitution and the ways it sets up to change laws. I don't recall it saying leos on the ground can just disregard any law they don't like. I already made it clear that if it was something clearly in violation of the constitution it won't happen. For example, a local town administrator wanted to enforce our statute that governs the storage of firearms. Meaning he wanted police to just walk into your house and make sure your gun is secured. Well he asked the local PD for advice and of it was legal. Guess what the PD told him? To kick rocks and that we follow the Constitution.

Do u realize how backwards that is? Guys don't trust us hate us even, want us to have no powers, yet you want us to have direct control over how we interpret laws on the street? Just piss on case law and statutes that we have to follow? You really want us having that power? I certainly don't want it. I'm happy with discretion I have because I use it to help people. Discretion is not total disregard for a law.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Does the state have the Constitutional powers to arrest and imprison people for what they chose to put into their own bodies?

 

[WalkingWolf]

Does the state have the Constitutional powers to arrest and imprison people for what they chose to put into their own bodies?

The state has the power/force/muscle to pretty much do as they please, no matter the constitution. IMO no they should not have that power or force, I am not a promoter of drugs, but it is not my business if someone wants to put it into their body. IMO Wade V Roe established due to privacy it is none of the gov business unless the deed is in public.

 

[Primus]

Does the state have the Constitutional powers to arrest and imprison people for what they chose to put into their own bodies?

It appears they do through many laws in every state many cases that have been appealed and gone to the ussc or sjc in my state. That's why I'm not understanding the "Constitution" aspect of drugs. Again its in the other thread.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[WalkingWolf]

Some people confuse force with constitution...:uhoh:

 

[Primus]

Some people confuse force with constitution...:uhoh:

Still not done yet huh?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Citizen]

Some people confuse force with constitution...:uhoh:

Willfully. In order to maintain a status quo traceable to the Middle Ages--I have the power, so I'm going to make you do what I want.

For example, "A bunch of us are gonna vote ourselves a constitution. But, then, we're gonna force it on you even if you didn't vote for it."