Listening to Sheriff Richard Mack and his interview about the oath keepers, shown at sheriffmack.com, who has written a book. This former sheriff has written a book and talks about defying the federal government by advising that the Sheriff of any county can deny entry to any federal agent or IRS agent or even arrest the president of the United States. In addition to keeping the federal government in check. Mack also impels that you can deny paying federal taxes to an extent, drawing on his interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, specifically the bill of rights. Mack also is rallying against the federal government stating that local Sheriff's should ignore federal gun control acts.Here's the problem with this idea. Although, by state Constitution, Mack is correct, the Sheriff is the ultimate law enforcement authority in each county, UNLESS the state Constitution has been amended relinquishing the Sheriff's power to a police agency (such as the PG county police). The federal government does have control and can make laws that create minimum requirements that citizens must adhear to, such as paying taxes. Don't pay taxes for a couple of years and see if the Sheriff of your local county will come rushing to your aid when the IRS throws you in the slammer... Sheriff's by their very nature are political figures that are elected to office to carry out a job. However, that job can not interfere with the lawful execution of a federal warrant or a federal mandate. This is due to the fact that the states representatives and state congress people are involved in making laws pass. These people are elected by you, the state people to represent you on behalf of your state in allowing/disallowing laws to pass federal muster.
So lets take a look at the tenth amendment (article 12) to the U.S. Constitution:
Article the twelfth [Amendment X]
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
What this means is that all other powers, not elaborated on by the constitution or prohibited by state constitutions, can be exercised by each state or the people... so, Mack is basically wrong. The U.S. Constitution gives the federal government the power to tax people, it does not limit the states from taxing people (which is why there is state taxes). All this clause means is that powers that are not given are up for grabs if not absorbed by other constitutions or federal mandates.
So lets talk about the right to bear arms. Most people think that the 4th amendment means that everyone has the right to be armed. No. The fourth amendment (really the II Amendment) states, "Article the fourth [Amendment II][4]
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
What this essentially means is that the Maryland national guard unit has the right to bear arms and to keep the security of the state.
Don't get us wrong, give everyone a gun, that way it will be fair!
Posts
4 comments:
You mean the 10th Amendment and the 2nd Amendment, not the 12th and the 4th. The points you make, however, are exactly right, IMO.
Eh, the constitution is written in such a manner that Article the twelfth is actully ammendment "X" (ten) and Article the Fourth is actully Amendment "II" if looking at the origional draft. Therefore, you are correct in a sense but so are we. If refering to the bill of rights, the "second draft" then yes. "The Tenth Amendment and the Fourth Amendment" but there are two additional articles....in the origional version.. the first not ratified and the second ratified in 1992:
Article the first [Not Ratified]
After the first enumeration required by the first article of the Constitution, there shall be one Representative for every thirty thousand, until the number shall amount to one hundred, after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall be not less than one hundred Representatives, nor less than one Representative for every forty thousand persons, until the number of Representatives shall amount to two hundred; after which the proportion shall be so regulated by Congress, that there shall not be less than two hundred Representatives, nor more than one Representative for every fifty thousand persons.
Article the second [Amendment XXVII - Ratified 1992]
No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.
So when this Sheriff Mack talks about the origional oath he is actuly talking about swearing to a document with articles that were not ratified oriionally.
Dont forget about Baltimore City MD also the Sheriff is not the boss in city limits and all of the counties in NJ.
Crapper you're way off on the second amendment. In the Heller case the SCOTUS addressed the issue stating that the 2nd amendment right IS an individual right rather than a collective right. Also, the N/G no longer fits the definition of militia since it is under the control of the federal government.
As Thomas Jefferson stated "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Also, the 10th amendment says that unless powers are specifically given to he federal government by the constitution, they fall under the authority of the state or the people. How in Gods name can that mean they are "up for grabs"? That's absolute nonsense. The federal government violates this amendment to the constitution on so many fronts it's ridiculous.
Technically it means that if the constitution doesn't give the feds the authority to do something, iy doesn't have the authority to do it. Period. If a state decides not to address something, it becomes a matter between the voters of the states and their elected state officials. In no way does it by default give the authority to the federal government.
Post a Comment