CO Sheriffs Say No to More Gun Control Tyranny

Although Senate Bill 2503-003 won’t take off until next year in August, sweeping changes to how Colorado’s residents can purchase certain firearms puts the onus on local sheriffs to enforce, but no help with funding of the new state mandates. I don’t understand no help with the funding, but regardless, WELD or Weld County Sheriff Steve Reem said all this bill has done is put him in the situation where his constituents think he is helping Democrats enforce a violation of the Second Amendment rights. They ask me all the time why I just don’t refuse to enforce it. Reem said, who has previously refused to enforce gun laws enacted during his time as sheriff, of what is the most conservative-leaning county of over 100,000 in population in the state? He said it’s not that easy.

Not enforcing it, he said, makes it harder on the constituents, not easier. If I ignore this and don’t issue the permits, I’m creating a bigger barrier for them to exercise their constitutional right to buy a gun. I’m trying to get out of the way. It’s unconstitutional, but until somebody soothes, I can’t at least not be a roadblock. Sheriffs are squarely in the middle of a gun conflict that we didn’t ask to be in. I think this is really simple. All the sheriffs need to do is simply, when anybody asks them about it, just send the Supreme Court case booklet at CSPOA.org and say, hey, we’re not doing that.

End of discussion. It’s clearly right out of that. I happen to have a copy of it here, but the issue, reading from the first page of the victory for state sovereignty, Mac and Prince versus the United States, suggests that this is the situation. The question presented in these cases is whether certain interim provisions of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, statute 1536, commanding state and local law enforcement of officers to conduct background checks on prospective handgun purchases and to perform certain related tasks. That’s what we have in this situation. I haven’t even read what those tasks are, but that’s what they are.

Violate the Constitution. As we know, at the end of this, we found out they did violate the Constitution. And in Colorado, hopeful buyers must first get fingerprinted to prove eligibility to own a gun. I don’t know how that proves it, because if you’ve never had your fingerprints taken before, I really don’t know. And then taking that proof to the local sheriff, meaning that now we have your fingerprints, who then gives them a card that approves them to take a special class. There they go again with another hoop and more money by a certified instructor, the details of which are not yet in place, of course.

Once the applicant passes the test, they will be put into a statewide database for five years. And that’s a long time, which gun dealers will then need to access to confirm the person is legally able to purchase a firearm. Again, baby steps towards total gun surveillance. Completely bogus. At least we shut down immediately, and the sheriffs are the ones to do it. Ask Richard Mack, you went all the way to the Supreme Court and proved the point. Do we need to go again? I don’t think so. I just think we need sheriffs to have the guts to partner with Sheriff Mack and hold the line, Jack.

Well, you just said it right, though. Do we need to go again? It seems like how many times do we make gun laws that they make the same gun laws again, and they make the next same gun laws again. And over and over and over, what are there 27,000 laws on the book or something? Most of those… That’s a crazy number, yeah. So, yes, in the United States, you pass a law, and then a couple years later, no one even knows that law exists, because there’s now a federal registry that’s probably 150 to 300 feet tall.

And then you make another law that was the same law to start with. But regardless, you’re right. They need to carry the handbook in. This is clearly the same exact situation. And I would suspect that that sheriff has no idea that that’s the case. And rather than being put in the middle, he simply says, this doesn’t exist. So you don’t need any fingerprints, and you better start complaining to somebody. Yeah, and we’re simply not doing it. We’ve already got a court case to prove it, and so on. [tr:trw].