Sheriffs across the United States are refusing to implement new gun control laws passed by state legislatures, according to a report by the New York Times.
The numbers are particularly high in Colorado, where the majority of sheriffs have come out against the state’s new gun laws, including provisions requiring background checks for private gun sales and the banning of magazines over 15 rounds. Fifty-five of the state’s 62 elected sheriffs joined a federal lawsuit filed in May arguing the new laws are unconstitutional.
Even for some of those that didn’t sign onto the lawsuit, enforcement of Colorado’s new gun restrictions isn’t high on their list of priorities.
“All law enforcement agencies consider the community standards — what is it that our community wishes us to focus on — and I can tell you our community is not worried one whit about background checks or high-capacity magazines,” said Sheriff W. Pete Palmer of Chaffee County, Colorado, to the Times.
Last month, a federal judge ruled the sheriffs did not have standing to sue as a group, but that the court would still rule on the Constitutionality of the laws in question.
Regardless of the outcome, Colorado Department of public Safety Spokesman Lance Clem told the Times that when it comes to enforcing the law, sheriffs have significant latitude to make their own decisions.
“We’re not in the position of telling sheriffs and chiefs what to do or not to do,” he said. “We have people calling us all the time, thinking they’ve got an issue with their sheriff, and we tell them we don’t have the authority to intervene.”
More at:
Showing posts with label security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label security. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 18, 2014
Tuesday, December 24, 2013
Obama Again Commits Soldiers In No-Win Situation – This Time, South Sudan
According to a report from Paul McLeary in DefenseNews.com, without much fanfare – or explanation to the American people — President Obama has again committed US forces by using his War Powers Resolution authority.
In the letter to the Speaker of the House and the President Pro tempore of the Senate on December 19, President Obama said that the soldiers, deployed on December 18, are equipped for combat, but that this force was deployed for the purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and property. This force will remain in South Sudan until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed.
The soldiers deployed are part of the US Army's East Africa Response Force to the capital of Juba to help evacuate American citizens and ensure the safety of embassy personnel there. The forty-five combat-ready soldiers are part of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division based in Ft Riley, Kansas, but who are on a year-long deployment in the Army’s Regionally Aligned Forces program, which marries brigade combat teams with combatant commands around the world to thicken their ranks.
More at:
In the letter to the Speaker of the House and the President Pro tempore of the Senate on December 19, President Obama said that the soldiers, deployed on December 18, are equipped for combat, but that this force was deployed for the purpose of protecting U.S. citizens and property. This force will remain in South Sudan until the security situation becomes such that it is no longer needed.
The soldiers deployed are part of the US Army's East Africa Response Force to the capital of Juba to help evacuate American citizens and ensure the safety of embassy personnel there. The forty-five combat-ready soldiers are part of the 2nd Brigade, 1st Infantry Division based in Ft Riley, Kansas, but who are on a year-long deployment in the Army’s Regionally Aligned Forces program, which marries brigade combat teams with combatant commands around the world to thicken their ranks.
More at:
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)

