Which Oklahoma Sheriffs will NOT help the Federal government in gun confiscation?

[flybeech]

The Republican establishment within the State of Oklahoma joined forces with the Democrats to ensure the reelection of Democrat Sheriff Whetsel for Oklahoma County. Oklahoma County voters have spoken and they want a Federalized county sheriff, who will protect and defend the Federal government against the citizens of Oklahoma County. Sheriff Whetsel owes a great, big debt of gratitude to Janet Napolitano and the Department of Homeland Security for the millions of dollars worth of military equipment and grant money he has been given. Undoubtedly, the Oklahoma County Sheriff's Office can be counted on as outstanding lap-dogs when the time comes for gun registration and confiscation.

I am leaving my home of nearly 50 years, in search of another county that knows how to elect a Sheriff that will follow the Constitution. Do any of the 77 Oklahoma counties have a Constitutional Sheriff? Have any Sheriffs in Oklahoma openly said they will resist tyranny, defend the Constitution and resist any gun confiscation?

 

[arkmark]

pretty sure that their are no sheriffs that would openly make statements such resisting tyranny out of fear of no longer being the sheriff when the time comes to resist. I'm praying that their will be some good level headed patriots in official areas that will make the right choices.

 

[RETOKSQUID]

You can forget about Tulsa county as well. Just try and get any NFA related form signed if you are not a member of the thin blue line. Trust is a must up here.

 

[Spata]

Maybe some small town ones, but the big city guys have already been bought.

 

[Jack T.]

Maybe some small town ones, but the big city guys have already been bought.

I'd say ALL the non-metropolitan counties. It's really hard to buy an election in a county with 7,000-10,000 active voters. . .most of which are not inside any city limits.

Now, small sheriffs might "officially" comply with some sort of registration scheme. "Sure, come by the office next week and we'll find the right papers for you to sign". . .but they're not gonna devote much time to it.

They're between a rock and a hard place. Either they a) ignore such a request from the .gov, incur the wrath of said .gov, and keep getting elected, or the b) follow such a request and get beat like a drum in the next election, or face a recall vote. Sheriffs are the highest Law Enforcement officer in the county and have authority exceeding any State or Federal officer.

 

[flybeech]

Well, I'm moving to any Oklahoma county smart enough to elect a Constitutional sheriff.

I've lived in Oklahoma County for nearly 50 years and saw for myself how the GOP effectively endorsed Democrat and Janet Napolitano BFF John Whetsel. I understand that it was critical to ensure the Oklahoma County sheriff's office was occupied with a globalist sympathizer and puppet. When the DHS decides to invade Oklahoma County with their 1.6 billion rounds of hollow-point, they need a lap-dog sheriff who will throw the door wide open.

I'm beginning to think there is not one, single Oklahoma county sheriff who proudly stands for the Constitution.

 

[SMS]

What difference does it make if the County Sheriff is a "Constitutionalist"?

If the city/town cops, State LEOs, National Guard, judges, and the D.A. come rolling in, do you really see the sheriff in any county standing in their way?

This Constitutional Sheriff thing is a fantasy. They are elected officials, politicians, and human...not mythical creatures with Gandalf-ish powers.

 

[flybeech]

What difference does it make if the County Sheriff is a "Constitutionalist"?

If the city/town cops, State LEOs, National Guard, judges, and the D.A. come rolling in, do you really see the sheriff in any county standing in their way?

This Constitutional Sheriff thing is a fantasy. They are elected officials, politicians, and human...not mythical creatures with Gandalf-ish powers.

I see. I stand corrected. I appreciate your correcting me.

I believed the Sheriff was the highest elected law enforcement officer in the land and had every right and authority to tell an oppressive tyrannical Federal government to pound sand, such Sheriffs Mack and Tony DeMeo have done, but thanks to you, I understand now that the things these mythical creatures did never happened.

I'm still having difficulty accepting your version that we live in a top-down hierarchy, with centralized powers that trump everything and the office of Sheriff no longer means anything. I was inspired by the book "The County Sheriff: America's Last Hope" by Richard Mack. His book is completely opposite of your comprehensive and deeply enlightened synopsis of the powers of the county Sheriff. I would enjoy reading your works that contradict Sheriff Mack's interpretation of the office.

Again, SMS, I appreciate your version of what is right and good. Top down central control is what you favor and admire. I look forward to reading your books.


http://cspoa.org/

 

[SMS]

It's not "top down", it's roles and responsibilities. It a sheriff's job to enforce the law, not interpret it based on his own opinions or sense of "constitutionality". There are no comprehensive "powers of the county sheriff". Every state has different constructs for it's sheriffs. In Oklahoma they are an extension of the courts and act on the authority of the courts.

Tell me what exactly your mythical Sheriff can and will do if the local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, backed by courts and D.A.s say or do something the sheriff disagrees with.

Refuse to act? Sure that's an option, but other LEOs can and will be called in to do the work.

Resist with force? Sure, but they won't do it, and if they did they would die or end up in jail. I doubt any of your hero-sheriffs would actually take it to that level....they don't have too, they are getting rich selling books and getting paid to speak.

 

[flybeech]

It's not "top down", it's roles and responsibilities. It a sheriff's job to enforce the law, not interpret it based on his own opinions or sense of "constitutionality". There are no comprehensive "powers of the county sheriff". Every state has different constructs for it's sheriffs. Some don't even have them. They are another office of the executive branch of local government.

Tell me what exactly your mythical Sheriff can and will do if the local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, backed by courts and D.A.s say or do something the sheriff disagrees with.

Refuse to act? Sure that's an option, but other LEOs can and will be called in to do the work.

Resist with force? Sure, but they won't do it, and if they did they would die or end up in jail. I doubt any of your hero-sheriffs would actually take it to that level....they don't have too, they are getting rich selling books and getting paid to speak.

I get it. The sheriff is a worthless myth and you strongly prefer and defend a police state. I understand that you strongly prefer corporate cities hiring law enforcement who is only accountable to the corporation that hires them to generate revenue. As you rightly pointed out, there are a few states that have legislatively eliminated the office of Sheriff, because these are modern times and law enforcement should never be in the hands of the voters.

I'm thankful that you have pointed out that none of the things Sheriff Mack, Sheriff DeMeo and many other sheriffs say they have done never actually happened and the police state is far better than some antiquated idea of an elected law enforcement officer accountable to the people. I understand that like many Americans, you scoff at adherence to the Constitution. I would like to hear your opinion of Oathkeepers.