Our Sheriffs have spoken - Is it time for civil disobedience by gun owners?


PDA






bds
January 27, 2013, 08:40 AM
Over 127 and growing number of our Sheriffs declared/pledged Obama gun legislation will not be enforced - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=698885

We have our rights to keep and bear arm under the Constitution which was supported by the US Supreme Court but our government wants to infringe on those rights.

Civil disobedience has worked successfully for various causes around the world. Is it time for gun owners?

This is the definition from Merriam-Webster - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civil%20disobedience

civil disobedience

Refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment. It is used especially as a nonviolent and usually collective means of forcing government concessions and has been a major tactic of nationalist movements in Africa and India, of the U.S. civil rights movement, and of labour and antiwar movements in many countries.

If you enjoyed reading about "Our Sheriffs have spoken - Is it time for civil disobedience by gun owners?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
bds
January 27, 2013, 08:42 AM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14322-gun-owners-refuse-to-register-under-new-york-law

Gun Owners Refuse to Register Under New York Law

Analysts say the legislation, passed in a frenzy last week in the wake of the Newtown shooting, represents the most brazen infringement on the right to keep and bear arms anywhere in the nation. Among other points, the so-called SAFE Act seeks to limit magazines to just seven bullets, require virtually all of the estimated one million semi-automatic rifles in the state to be registered with authorities, mandate reporting of patients who express indications that they may have thoughts about hurting themselves or others by doctors, and more.

Aside from being unconstitutional, experts on gun violence also point out that the draconian schemes are a bad idea: Studies have repeatedly shown that more guns lead to less crime, and the phenomenon is obvious across America — just compare Chicago or D.C. to Alaska or Wyoming. The mandated reporting requirements for doctors, meanwhile, have come under fire from across the political spectrum. Whether it will even be possible to enforce the bill, however, remains to be seen.

Preparations are already being made for mass resistance. “I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said President Brian Olesen with American Shooters Supply, among the biggest gun dealers in the state, in an interview with the New York Post.

Even government officials admit that forcing New Yorkers to register their guns will be a tough sell, and they are apparently aware that massive non-compliance will be the order of the day. “Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that,’’ a source in the Cuomo administration told the Post, adding that officials expect “widespread violations” of the new statute.

Threats of imprisoning gun owners for up to a year and confiscating their weapons are already being issued by governor’s office, headed by a rabid anti-Second Amendment extremist who suggested before the bill passed that “confiscation” of all semi-automatic rifles was being considered. If tens or even hundreds of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens refuse to comply, however, analysts say New York would either have to start raising taxes and building a lot more prisons, or give up on the scheme that experts say will do nothing to reduce violence and that lawmakers say is aimed at eventual confiscation.

Activists involved in the state-wide boycott against the unconstitutional statute who spoke to the Post almost taunted authorities, saying gun owners would essentially dare authorities to “come and take it away.” According to the paper, leaders of some of the state’s hundreds of gun clubs, dealers, and non-profit organizations, citing the New York Constitution’s guarantee that gun rights “cannot be infringed,” are currently involved in organizing the resistance. Among the primary concerns is that, with registration, authorities would know where to go for confiscation, an idea already proposed openly by Governor Cuomo himself.

“They’re saying, ‘F--- the governor! F--- Cuomo! We’re not going to register our guns,’ and I think they’re serious. People are not going to do it. People are going to resist,” explained State Rifle and Pistol Association President Tom King, who also serves on the National Rifle Association board of directors. “They’re taking one of our guaranteed civil rights, and they’re taking it away.”

bds
January 27, 2013, 08:52 AM
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/hit_us_with_your_best_shot_andy_5rxZg0gYBJJhkLBtiTPMfJ

New York Post - Hit us with your best shot, Andy!

Assault-rifle owners statewide are organizing a mass boycott of Gov. Cuomo’s new law mandating they register their weapons, daring officials to “come and take it away,” The Post has learned.

Gun-range owners and gun-rights advocates are encouraging hundreds of thousands of owners to defy the law, saying it’d be the largest act of civil disobedience in state history.

“I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said Brian Olesen, president of the American Shooters Supply, one of the largest gun dealers in the state.

Officials estimate at least 1 million semiautomatic rifles are owned in the state, sources said.

And come April 15, 2014 — when Cuomo is expected to be running for re-election — they all have to be registered with the State Police.

But because the rifles have been legal but unregistered until now, authorities don’t know who has them or where they are located.

State officials will be nervously watching the registration figures to see how many gun owners comply, sources said.

“I believe you will have people stepping forward, saying, ‘Here I am. See? I have what you call an assault rifle. Now come and take it away,’ ’’ said a gun-rights activist and boycott organizer.

That’s exactly what state officials are worried about.

“Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that,’’ said a Cuomo-administration source who added that officials expect “widespread violations’’ of the new law. Owners who refuse to register could face a class-A misdemeanor — punishable by up to a year in prison.

And an owner’s weapon could also be confiscated, which could be worth several thousands of dollars.

National Rifle Association President David Keene told The Post yesterday that he wasn’t surprised by the planned boycott.

“While we don’t get involved in campaigns to resist the law, I will say this: Historic experience here and in Canada shows that when you try to force gun owners into a registration and licensing system, there’s usually mass opposition and mass noncompliance,” he said. “I think it’s going to be very difficult for the governor to get mass compliance with this new law.”

Leaders of some of the state’s 300 gun clubs, gun dealers and Second Amendment organizations are organizing the boycott — and the heaviest interest is in Suffolk County, the Capital District and the Buffalo region, sources said.

The organizers point to a little-known guarantee of gun ownership contained in New York’s own “Civil Rights Law,” which was ratified the same year as the Constitution .

The state statute says the right to keep and bear arms “cannot be infringed” — stronger than the Second Amendment, which says it “shall not be infringed.’’

bds
January 27, 2013, 09:06 AM
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/14322-gun-owners-refuse-to-register-under-new-york-law
Throughout the short discussion on the bill, GOP legislators warned about the prospect of resistance — potentially resulting in violence. Indeed, even some lawmakers have already promised to defy the new unconstitutional statute.

Republican state Assemblyman Steve Katz, for example, told his colleagues during the debate that the legislation’s attempt to re-define semi-automatic rifles as banned “assault weapons” creates “a new class of criminals overnight.” However, he also mentioned that he had no intention of complying with the arbitrary seven-bullet maximum demanded under the legislation.

“I leave my wife and three young daughters home alone for days at a time to represent my constituents here,” Katz said on the floor of the Assembly. “After what happened to the young mother in Loganville, Georgia who defended her two young children against an intruder, this bill will turn me into a criminal because you can bet that before I leave to do the people’s work, there will be more than seven bullets in the magazine of my wife’s firearm.”

He concluded his plea for respecting gun rights with some quotes about the reason for the Second Amendment and New York state’s even more overt prohibition on infringements. The first one he read came from George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.”

... Meanwhile, at the national level, some Democrat lawmakers and President Obama are seeking draconian new gun bans and a wide array of other infringements on the right to keep and bear arms. State governments and sheriffs nationwide, however, are speaking out, working to nullify any assault on gun rights, and if needed, arrest federal officials trying to enforce unconstitutional rules. With the amount of resistance already expressing itself in New York, analysts say attempting similar schemes at the federal level would be literally insane.

Hoppy
January 27, 2013, 09:08 AM
What is it called when the administration announces it won't follow the law? I.e. they will not enforce immigration laws.. administrative disobedience?

glove
January 27, 2013, 09:13 AM
Lets just hope that people will stand up for there rights. After all they did put Obama back in and we knew what he is going to do. I swear I heard Obama say he would up hold and defend the Constitution of the United States when he was sworn in.

TIMC
January 27, 2013, 09:44 AM
All I can say is, if he wont there are those that will.

GAF
January 27, 2013, 10:22 AM
For the tough internet commando. They will come and smash you . They will say you are a kook . The news media will repeat that lie over and over again.

They will move on to the next name on their list. That is what the machine will do at your expense $$$ !!!
You tax dollars at work !

black_powder_Rob
January 27, 2013, 01:17 PM
Except if you don't register it how will they know?

chris in va
January 27, 2013, 01:26 PM
In no way should New Yorkers comply with this absurd law.

essayons21
January 27, 2013, 02:12 PM
What is it called when the administration announces it won't follow the law? I.e. they will not enforce immigration laws.. administrative disobedience?

Tyranny?

Our nation was founded and flourished under the rule of law. Many of the current crop of politicians and bureaucrats at all levels seek to replace the rule of law with the rule of public opinion.

This is no new trend, it has just taken the threatening of our final safeguard of liberty, the Second Amendment, to awaken enough of us into taking action.

Cosmoline
January 27, 2013, 02:20 PM
No. The best way to undermine the efforts in NY and other anti-gun states is to leave and take your tax dollars and other contributions with you. Guys like Cuomo are essentially organized crime racketeers. They don't care if the have to put you in a hole. They WANT to. But these states have something else in common beside anti-gun laws. They're all hurting BADLY in the pocket book. NY is no exception. If enough income earners pull out and leave their house to the crackheads the states will continue to fall apart, lose representatives and wield less political power. That should be the goal. Bring money, talent and resources to the states that will appreciate these things. And get a lighter tax burden in the bargain. Win win.

MrTwigg
January 27, 2013, 03:05 PM
We'll see who's serious once the shootin' starts.

Texan Scott
January 27, 2013, 05:03 PM
Just curious.... if the governor, attorney general, and CLEOs of a state larger than any country in western Europe were to order their subordinate jurisdictions not to comply, and encourage the citizens to quietly carry on with their lives... could you really call the average man's actions 'civil disobedience'?

krupparms
January 27, 2013, 07:44 PM
I didn't agree with the last AWB. But it didn't matter! The Gun manufacturers & Ammunition Companys did, along with the gun importers! I had no say in those decisions & no one I know did eather! It still happened! We must get the support of a large group of people that have a lot to lose by supporting us! We can ignore them but we do it at a great danger to our liberty! I hope more LEOs do support us but there's a lot that don't! I saw quite a few LEOs behind the senators on C-Span, while they were calling for the AWB! Let's hope we can win some hearts & minds. JMTs.

dmancornell
January 27, 2013, 07:47 PM
The state will respond as they do against all civil disobedience: with crushing violence.

BSA1
January 28, 2013, 08:58 AM
I have repeatedly posted that gun owners are our worse enemy.

The Government has given us the most powerful weapon in the world...the privilege to vote. Yet most gun owners fail to use it and now whine about the gun control laws being passed.

Civil disobedience worked in India but it took many years, surviving severe government crackdowns, required massive support from the population and the cost of many thousands of lives and a powerful leader. And remember Indians did not enjoy the right to vote.

If you personally are willing to endure imprisonment, loss of all of personal property and assets, separation from your family and friends and possible death along with all of your followers experience the same events and have the ability to persuade others to do the same I suggest you change your name to Gandhi.

psyopspec
January 28, 2013, 09:05 AM
I'm relieved to see a growing segment of those who would be expected to enforce these laws at the point of LEO interacting with "violators" are taking this stand. Hats off, gents.

What is it called when the administration announces it won't follow the law? I.e. they will not enforce immigration laws.. administrative disobedience?

Tyranny?

Then what's it called when this administration has deported illegal aliens at a higher rate than the last one?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/27/obama-is-deporting-more-immigrants-than-bush-republicans-dont-think-thats-enough/

scaatylobo
January 28, 2013, 09:16 AM
Any and all LEO's that were standing behind gov cuomo were ORDERED to do so.

I am in NYS and I have spoken to all officers I know and all retirees and they all say the gov. is full of hot air and they will NOT do as asked.

Most feel that they are free men.

mcdonl
January 28, 2013, 09:23 AM
Just curious, does anyone know of any lawsuits against the State of NY?

mbt2001
January 28, 2013, 09:35 AM
Is there a way to start a legal fund for New Yorker's refusing to comply? Does anyone have any contact in the NRA that could start something like this by donation?

sarge83
January 28, 2013, 09:36 AM
They did what they were ordered to do, stand behind gov. windbag. I hope you are right when push comes to shove and they are ordered to disarm or shoot their fellow citizens. Some will not follow orders, but sadly some will commit murder and not lose a wink of sleep over it because they were "just following orders or doing their job".

A time for choosing is coming in America it would seem and we are going to be forced into making some hard choices.

mcdonl
January 28, 2013, 09:44 AM
Some will not follow orders, but sadly some will commit murder and not lose a wink of sleep over it because they were "just following orders or doing their job".

Murder. I dont think so.

I wake up everyday with one goal. Provide for my family. If it were me, I would not jeopordize my career and family for a political cause no matter how important it is and I would not ask anyone else to do so on my behalf.

This is America. We voted these people in office, and if they change a law and get the support to do so we have no one to blame but ourselves. This is not the fault of the people paid to put their lives on the lines to protect and serve. We do not need to like the laws, and we can change them with due process but right now, we are fighting against the same people we elected and it is a pretty even match the way I see it. Until the next election.

docsleepy
January 28, 2013, 09:47 AM
There are articles detailing the low percentage of guns in many nations that are ever registered when required. Either move out-of-state, or get a good safe, don't say anything to anyone, put that gun in the safe, and leave it for the day that Armageddon comes.

It will be obvious that their compliance rate is extremely low. Wait for the courts to declare it unconstitutional.

NeuseRvrRat
January 28, 2013, 09:53 AM
George Washington: “A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government

this is not an accurate quote. it is often spouted on gun forums. very sad that one of new york's legislators also spouted it off.

loose noose
January 28, 2013, 10:00 AM
Just look at what happened in California, You still can't buy an AR-15 with cosmetic accessories such as a flash suppressor, or a pictanny rail, or heaven forbid a 30 round magazine, let alone a hand grip. Where were the People of that State when these laws were enacted. I did live in that State for about 30 years, but moved out just before the draconian laws were enacted, because of the taxation, not the gun laws at the time. Most gun dealers can't even ship a firearm to California let alone ammo. Someone tell me how is New York any different? lol

tacxted
January 28, 2013, 10:06 AM
I feel the time for civil disobedience is nearing.

Americans do not want to give up their guns, and one look at the united kingdom will encourage many not to.

But the time isnt right for civil disobedience.

I would like to see a massive gathering of armed americans march onto the lincoln memorial and fill the national mall
with thousands of free americans, and in one unified voice say, "we will not obey."

I would love to see that day. It would cement forever that americans will keep their guns.

Deer_Freak
January 28, 2013, 10:19 AM
Law enforcement in urban areas will enforce the ban. Law enforcement agencies in a large cities have become militarized. They think they can enforce registration and put down any civil disobedience. They smashed the occupiers and they think they can smash anything else that might pop up.

Rural sheriffs might not enforce the ban. They lack the manpower and they don't agree with the law personally. It will work in the same way as the Canadian effort To register firearms that was abandoned after it was an abysmal failure.

chucknbach
January 28, 2013, 10:24 AM
For the tough internet commando. They will come and smash you . They will say you are a kook . The news media will repeat that lie over and over again.

They will move on to the next name on their list. That is what the machine will do at your expense $$$ !!!
You tax dollars at work !

The state will respond as they do against all civil disobedience: with crushing violence.

Better for us to suffer than our children.

Do we do the right thing or the safe thing?

The Obama regime has given themselves unprecedented power to kill, detain, silence, basically strip all God given rights listed in the Bill of Rights from us.

The Obama insurrectionists have disobeyed the highest law in the land, The Constitution. They are lawbreakers, oathbreakers and have set their course on open rebellion.

Murder. I dont think so.

I wake up everyday with one goal. Provide for my family. If it were me, I would not jeopordize my career and family for a political cause no matter how important it is and I would not ask anyone else to do so on my behalf.

This is America. We voted these people in office, and if they change a law and get the support to do so we have no one to blame but ourselves. This is not the fault of the people paid to put their lives on the lines to protect and serve. We do not need to like the laws, and we can change them with due process but right now, we are fighting against the same people we elected and it is a pretty even match the way I see it. Until the next election.
Today 07:36 AM


We maybe out of time for due process but I hope not. We can't just roll over hoping to get them next time, in the elections. These usurper presidents are consolidating power than passing it on to the next one. I get sick to my stomache thinking what we might see in our liftime but it's time we wake up and take responsibility and do our duty. "Evil prevails when good men do nothing".

If you know someone in law enforcement or the military pass this link onto them.
http://oathkeepers.org/oath/

We don't want any repeats of hurricane Katrina.

mbt2001
January 28, 2013, 10:27 AM
Law enforcement in urban areas will enforce the ban. Law enforcement agencies in a large cities have become militarized. They think they can enforce registration and put down any civil disobedience. They smashed the occupiers and they think they can smash anything else that might pop up.

The British also tried confiscation... The same is true here in Texas. The Battle of Gonzalez, the event that touched off the Revolution, broke out when Mexican troops tried to disarm Texans.

We are lucky that we have some measure of redress compared to our forefathers. If we stand fast, passively resist, start legal funds, pressure the elected officials, fight in court; then WE MIGHT not need to follow in the footsteps of our forefathers.

Somebody had to say it.

pendennis
January 28, 2013, 10:50 AM
Civil disobedience is a tough nut for many to accept, and use, as a political means.

The 1960's civil rights campaign, for those who did not live through it, is an abject lesson in how social changed is effected by a minority.

In places like Selma, Montgomery, and Birmingham, Alabama; in Richmond, Virginia; and a host of other cities, blacks were willing to be arrested and put in jail for defying what they perceived to be a tyrannical government. They withstood assaults by dogs, police, and high-pressure fire hoses, to get the point across. They were locked up en masse, for disobeying dispersal orders. They marched from Selma to Birmingham.

The question each person must ask him/herself is, "Am I willing to go to jail, and withstand the judicial system, in order to have my 2nd Amendment rights upheld?"

Can each of us "pull a Gandhi", and use peaceful disobedience to force the issue?

sarge83
January 28, 2013, 11:33 AM
mcdonl,

I guess we can agree to disagree. At this point I have to question due process as a citizen. We are supposed to trust the system when we watch it daily fly in the face of the law and common sense. Those elected are flagrantly violating the Constitution they and you swore an oath to defend without consequences.

If you receive an order that you know is un-Constitutional and flat out flies in the face of the laws of God and nature and in the process of carrying out that order kill a citizen who defies the order you can reason it away and say you were following orders but I don't think their family is going to see it that way.

Again I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

mcdonl
January 28, 2013, 12:11 PM
mcdonl,I guess we can agree to disagree

Yes, on this single item only. Keep up the fight brother.

mrvco
January 28, 2013, 12:13 PM
At what point can someone in NYS get this in front of the courts?

It is amazing how we've gone so quickly from "Dissent is the Highest Form of Patriotism", to "Capitulation is the Highest Form of Patriotism".

mcdonl
January 28, 2013, 02:18 PM
This thread did prompt me to get a response from my Sheriff so I know where we stand at the next election...



***** *********
** ***** ***
Limington, ME 04049
January 28, 2013


Maurice Ouellette
Sheriff
York County Sheriff’s Office
1 Layman Way
Alfred, ME 04002

Dear Sheriff Ouellett:

As a concerned American, and citizen of York County I wanted to write you to get a formal response to the following questions:

1. What is your opinion on the ownership of AR-15 rifles with greater than 10 round magazine capacity by residents of York County?
2. Would you, as the Sheriff of York County use force to execute a confiscation of currently legal firearms if the proposed bill to ban “Assault Weapons” or the outcomes of the ban leads to such actions?

I am actively lobbying against this bill, and the strongest tool that I have at my disposal is a pencil in a ballot box. I want to know where my elected officials stand on this so I can campaign for or against them.

Now is not the time for politics, now is the time for a firm stance on one side or the other so that registered voters know where to put the “x” at the polls.

To make it easy on you, I have enclosed a stamped addressed envelope for your convenience.

Sincerely,

***** *********


Resident of York County

This will go out in the mail today.

If you enjoyed reading about "Our Sheriffs have spoken - Is it time for civil disobedience by gun owners?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!