• 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.

Good news for indiana

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,163
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin

Good news! About time!

An Indiana sheriff went on the record that he would disregard an executive order from President Barack Obama that mandated law enforcement begin registering firearms.

Elkhart County Sheriff Brad Rogers appeared on a local PBS panel discussion about gun rights and gun control in the wake of recent university shootings to say that he wouldn’t obey orders from on high that went against his constitutional oath.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/14/indiana-sheriff-goes-on-the-record-with-vow-to-president-obama-on-future-executive-actions-on-gun-control/
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,240
Location
here nc

Good news! About time!

An Indiana sheriff went on the record that he would disregard an executive order from President Barack Obama that mandated law enforcement begin registering firearms.

Elkhart County Sheriff Brad Rogers appeared on a local PBS panel discussion about gun rights and gun control in the wake of recent university shootings to say that he wouldn’t obey orders from on high that went against his constitutional oath.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2015/10/14/indiana-sheriff-goes-on-the-record-with-vow-to-president-obama-on-future-executive-actions-on-gun-control/
of course, the kind peace officer from Elkhart says that...must be re-election time in the hoosier state...out they roll with commentary about the 'what ifs' and the how bout this' reactionary BS to either incite or appease the voting masses..

ipse
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,163
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
of course, the kind peace officer from Elkhart says that...must be re-election time in the hoosier state...out they roll with commentary about the 'what ifs' and the how bout this' reactionary BS to either incite or appease the voting masses..

ipse
Aah! Clintonian! as defined by Anderson Cooper of CNN
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,449
Location
Valhalla
After getting past the SIGN UP FOR THE NEWSLETTER OR DIE crap (use "all stories" on the left side of the screen) I found out this comment was made on a PBS panel discussion held shortly after the UCC shooting in Oregon. I don't see any connection to electioneering. Google gets me nothing about there even being an election for the office in 2015. http://www.fox28.com/category/152291/local-election-results

Someone might want to loosen their aluminum beanie.

stay safe.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,240
Location
here nc
i'm sorry skid, et al., his re-election was in Nov 14. here is a quote from the local rag about the incumbent sheriff:
quote:
When voters go the polls next week, they will find incumbent Brad Rogers on the ballot for county sheriff. But that’s not quite accurate. Sure, he wants another term, but what he really wants is unsurpassed power in law enforcement. But that’s not quite accurate, either. He wants to not only enforce laws, but also decide which laws aren’t legitimate and therefore can’t be enforced.

Rogers’ ideological inclinations have been evident locally, particularly with his 2011 confrontation with the Food and Drug Administration over unpasteurized milk from a local dairy and with his grandstanding with Cliven Bundy in Nevada this past spring.

Rogers sits on the Council of Sheriffs, Peace Officers and Public Officials of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), which has also named him to its Wall of Honor. The CSPOA advocates an unreasonably strict reading of the Constitution. Because it doesn’t include mention levels of law enforcement, the CSPOA and similar organizations argue, the county sheriff is the ultimate protector of the people.

“As the highest elected law enforcement officer in the nation, the Sheriff has great authority to protect the people from criminals, and sometimes an overreaching government itself,” Rogers posted on Facebook after his trip to the Bundy ranch. “Even though this is currently occurring in Nevada, something similar will be coming to a location near you. You can bet on it.”

Rogers – who refuses to join the mainstream National Association of Sheriffs, which maintains that sheriffs are empowered to enforce laws and not interpret them – now moves in an orbit of rabid right-wingers. unquote

http://www.elkharttruth.com/living/Community-Blogs/Blue-Eyes/2014/11/02/Sheriff-Brad-Rogers-connections-with-right-wing-extremism-are-a-disturbing-development-for-Elkhart-County-community-blogger-says.html

now, let's be impressed and excited with this savant for his bravado statement(s) about something that 'could be', or 'might be', or 'possible be', something the president decides to go forward with.

sorry for presuming the sheriff was running for local office with this silly new plug as it would appear there could/might/maybe higher aspirations leading this individual to lead the awe inspiring CSPOA, especially with enough national publicity.

just saying...

ipse
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,449
Location
Valhalla
. I may have to drive up to Elkhart and teach these local yokels a few things about how to pick a proper sheriff. I am certain that they will be glad to see me and welcome my assistance.
But.... But....

But nobody has offered to pay your bus fare, put you up in a sleazy motel, and give you Mickey D gift certificates to cover your meals.

Have not not learned that is necessary to be invited multiple times and continually refuse?

stay safe.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,240
Location
here nc
gut, you might plan on stay'g a bit in elkhart...the nice sheriff won 73% of the 33K votes cast...seem a goodly number of the county's citizens (51.4K) turned out to vote as they must like the rep sheriff.

ipse
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,131
Location
White Oak Plantation
Being elected = you are a politician...with a gun in this case. The day after "I won party", the next election cycle is near and the vote seeking must begin.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,163
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
i'm sorry skid, et al., his re-election was in Nov 14. here is a quote from the local rag about the incumbent sheriff:
quote:
When voters go the polls next week, they will find incumbent Brad Rogers on the ballot for county sheriff. But that’s not quite accurate. Sure, he wants another term, but what he really wants is unsurpassed power in law enforcement. But that’s not quite accurate, either. He wants to not only enforce laws, but also decide which laws aren’t legitimate and therefore can’t be enforced.

Rogers’ ideological inclinations have been evident locally, particularly with his 2011 confrontation with the Food and Drug Administration over unpasteurized milk from a local dairy and with his grandstanding with Cliven Bundy in Nevada this past spring.

Rogers sits on the Council of Sheriffs, Peace Officers and Public Officials of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), which has also named him to its Wall of Honor. The CSPOA advocates an unreasonably strict reading of the Constitution. Because it doesn’t include mention levels of law enforcement, the CSPOA and similar organizations argue, the county sheriff is the ultimate protector of the people.

“As the highest elected law enforcement officer in the nation, the Sheriff has great authority to protect the people from criminals, and sometimes an overreaching government itself,” Rogers posted on Facebook after his trip to the Bundy ranch. “Even though this is currently occurring in Nevada, something similar will be coming to a location near you. You can bet on it.”

Rogers – who refuses to join the mainstream National Association of Sheriffs, which maintains that sheriffs are empowered to enforce laws and not interpret them – now moves in an orbit of rabid right-wingers. unquote

http://www.elkharttruth.com/living/Community-Blogs/Blue-Eyes/2014/11/02/Sheriff-Brad-Rogers-connections-with-right-wing-extremism-are-a-disturbing-development-for-Elkhart-County-community-blogger-says.html

now, let's be impressed and excited with this savant for his bravado statement(s) about something that 'could be', or 'might be', or 'possible be', something the president decides to go forward with.

sorry for presuming the sheriff was running for local office with this silly new plug as it would appear there could/might/maybe higher aspirations leading this individual to lead the awe inspiring CSPOA, especially with enough national publicity.

just saying...

ipse
Now I am confused. He is in line with right wing extremists according to the article. Isn't that ok as long as they aren't the jihadi types like the Aryan Nation etc... That is better than lining up with left wing extremists. No? Would you want a BLM land seizure and he do nothing? Should he side with the feds when they come after a vet's gun even when he is sane and law abiding because he just might have PTSD but the VA couldn't diagnose him? I could go on. If he took the oath to uphold and defend the constitution, is he not doing it?
 

cce1302

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2008
Messages
270
Location
South Bend, Indiana, USA
I appreciate the one "tongue in cheek" comment.

To the rest of you who are judging this guy on one story picked up in the national news, Sheriff Rogers is the real deal.

I lived in the next county for 8 years, and have nothing but respect for Sheriff Rogers. I have several friends who have worked for him or know him personally.

He is about as consistently pro freedom as they come. He kicked the feds out of his county when they tried to keep citizens from selling and buying raw milk. He personally traveled to support Clive Bundy.

He has gone on the record saying that though he has been offered armored vehicles from the Feds, he will not accept them. This is certainly not the first time he has voiced his conviction concerning the role of the Sheriff in regard to the Constitution.




But as Mr. Gutshot pointed out, it takes hundreds of miles of distance and a 30-second sound byte to know what's really going on in Sheriff Rogers' head. Well done, Solus. You're brilliant.
 

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,015
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
...But as Mr. Gutshot pointed out, it takes hundreds of miles of distance and a 30-second sound byte to know what's really going on in Sheriff Rogers' head. Well done, Solus. You're brilliant.
FYI - it's sound "bite".

And, now you've gone and given Solus a big head! :eek:
 

ICBM

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
76
Location
McCordsville, IN
Well, I don't have many guns, and none are illegal, so I don't care much one way or another about having to register. It doesn't seem much different from registering a vehicle. If there was a law requiring me to register my motor vehicles, and I had one that I just have as a spare/used rarely/junker (or vehicle I use only on my property, if I had a lot of land) and didn't want to register anyway, I just wouldn't. If you could legally posses the firearm regardless of registration, it wouldn't make much of a difference in penalty if you were caught. It is simply a failure to register, and any penalty would have to be proportional to the offense and prior convictions.

"The forfeiture of respondent’s entire $357,144 would be grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense. His crime was solely a reporting offense. It was permissible to transport the currency out of the country so long as he reported it. And because §982(a)(1) orders currency forfeited for a “willful” reporting violation, the essence of the crime is a willful failure to report. Furthermore, the District Court found his violation to be unrelated to any other illegal activities. Whatever his other vices, respondent does not fit into the class of persons for whom the statute was principally designed: money launderers, drug traffickers, and tax evaders. And the maximum penalties that could have been imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines, a 6-month sentence and a $5,000 fine, confirm a minimal level of culpability and are dwarfed by the $357,144 forfeiture sought by the Government. The harm that respondent caused was also minimal. The failure to report affected only the Government, and in a relatively minor way. There was no fraud on the Government and no loss to the public fisc. Had his crime gone undetected, the Government would have been deprived only of the information that $357,144 had left the country. Thus, there is no articulable correlation between the $357,144 and any Government injury."
- United States v. Bajakajian (96-1487), Pp. 14-17.

That's on top of the fact that his Executive Order doesn't actually have any teeth whatsoever, because it's not a federal law passed by congress and registration of firearms has always been a power delegated to the states, with the exception of NFA weapons.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,240
Location
here nc
Well, I don't have many guns, and none are illegal, so I don't care much one way or another about having to register. It doesn't seem much different from registering a vehicle. If there was a law requiring me to register my motor vehicles, and I had one that I just have as a spare/used rarely/junker (or vehicle I use only on my property, if I had a lot of land) and didn't want to register anyway, I just wouldn't. If you could legally posses the firearm regardless of registration, it wouldn't make much of a difference in penalty if you were caught. It is simply a failure to register, and any penalty would have to be proportional to the offense and prior convictions.

"The forfeiture of respondent’s entire $357,144 would be grossly disproportional to the gravity of his offense. His crime was solely a reporting offense. It was permissible to transport the currency out of the country so long as he reported it. And because §982(a)(1) orders currency forfeited for a “willful” reporting violation, the essence of the crime is a willful failure to report. Furthermore, the District Court found his violation to be unrelated to any other illegal activities. Whatever his other vices, respondent does not fit into the class of persons for whom the statute was principally designed: money launderers, drug traffickers, and tax evaders. And the maximum penalties that could have been imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines, a 6-month sentence and a $5,000 fine, confirm a minimal level of culpability and are dwarfed by the $357,144 forfeiture sought by the Government. The harm that respondent caused was also minimal. The failure to report affected only the Government, and in a relatively minor way. There was no fraud on the Government and no loss to the public fisc. Had his crime gone undetected, the Government would have been deprived only of the information that $357,144 had left the country. Thus, there is no articulable correlation between the $357,144 and any Government injury."
- United States v. Bajakajian (96-1487), Pp. 14-17.

That's on top of the fact that his Executive Order doesn't actually have any teeth whatsoever, because it's not a federal law passed by congress and registration of firearms has always been a power delegated to the states, with the exception of NFA weapons.
can i have some...whatever you are taking...really!!

not sure what you mean about none of your firearms are illegal?

not sure what you mean 'if there was vehicle registration?' you mean the hoosier BMV put this purdy website together for no reason: http://www.in.gov/bmv/2334.htm

not sure what you mean 'wouldn't make much of a difference in penalty' ~ confiscation & loss of your not many firearms isn't much of a penalty??

BTW how long did Bajakajian do without his monies and trust me i would have challenged the confiscation of $357K cuz it was $357K.

finally, you going to judicially challenge the nice government agency over your $500 (MSRP) pistol?

do me a favor...please send me your firearms since as you stated "I don't care much one way or another about having to register..." and i will protect them down here somewhere safe.

ipse
 

ICBM

Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2014
Messages
76
Location
McCordsville, IN
can i have some...whatever you are taking...really!!

not sure what you mean about none of your firearms are illegal?

not sure what you mean 'if there was vehicle registration?' you mean the hoosier BMV put this purdy website together for no reason: http://www.in.gov/bmv/2334.htm

not sure what you mean 'wouldn't make much of a difference in penalty' ~ confiscation & loss of your not many firearms isn't much of a penalty??

BTW how long did Bajakajian do without his monies and trust me i would have challenged the confiscation of $357K cuz it was $357K.

finally, you going to judicially challenge the nice government agency over your $500 (MSRP) pistol?

do me a favor...please send me your firearms since as you stated "I don't care much one way or another about having to register..." and i will protect them down here somewhere safe.

ipse
1.) I don't possess anything that has a serial number removed or a NFA firearm without the tax stamp, for example.

2.) You only need to register a vehicle if you operate it in Indiana and it's subject to excise tax.

3.) They can't confiscate your gun because of not registering it. You still have a right to possess it. Unless not registering it is a felony.

4.) Who cares, if you win the criminal case, you can sue for damages for the unlawful seizure. Then buy more guns.

5.) If they try to enforce such a law, of course. It wouldn't make a difference if it was Francisco Scaramanga's gun, or a Saturday night special.

6.) I think you confuse me not registering regardless of the law with not minding to have to register. I simply wouldn't. Because it's not a power held by the executive branch anyway.
 
Top