The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA) are roaming around the country with their message of ignoring unconstitutional laws and reverting to enforcing the view of the U.S. Constitution. Standing up and giving speeches along with shaking hands with law enforcement officers encouraging them to abide by their oaths. The Center for Public Integrity, wrote about this mission, “its ambition is to encourage law enforcement officers to defy laws they decide themselves are illegal.” This posse details how they are deeply concerned by the constant overreach by the federal government, specifically gun rights, taxes, land management, and private property rights. CSPOA founder Richard Mack labeled the federal government as “the greatest threat we face today,” and that he and his Calvary will be “the army to set our nation free.”
At the CSPOA 2014 convention, a growing number of sheriffs are continuing to sign the declaration of resistance to any federal agents who try to register or seize firearms, seize property, or arrest anyone in their counties without their consent. Mack told the post that he has recruited “several hundred” of the 3,000+ sheriffs in our country to be members of the CSPOA, with hundreds more confirmed to be headed his way.
In the 1990s as Graham County Sheriff in Arizona, Mack and Sheriff Printz from Montana argued the Brady Bill’s requirement that forced all local law enforcement agencies to perform background checks on gun purchasers. Victory was claimed when The Supreme Court ruled in Mack’s favor. The late Justice Antonin Scalia wrote, to confirm the states rights sovereignty in the 10th Amendment and that the federal government had no right to use the local police in 50 states to do its tyrannical dirty work. This ruling was short-lived because a national database was enacted to authorize gun dealers to execute background checks that took the cops out of the equation.
Mack rose in popularity while he created the CSPOA back in 2011. Mack was at a recent police training course when he proclaimed that “gun control is against the law” and that his next goal was to enroll at least a quarter of the sheriffs to join the constitutional association. Mack asserted, “And then everybody in this country has at least two or three places in each state where they can go for refuge, find a true constitutional sheriff who’ll tell the federal government, ‘You’re not going to abuse citizens anymore.’”
Sheriff Mack’s principles are still echoing through from his successful skirmish with the Brady Bill where he says, “we went through a lawful process to show the government is out of control, to force sheriffs to comply.” Mack continued, that John Roll, the U.S. District Judge who was killed in the unfortunate incident that targeted U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords in Arizona in 2011 delicately described every sheriff’s dilemma: “He said I was forced to choose between obeying the law or keeping my oath of office. He described my problem in one sentence.”
His staunch belief that any gun regulation violates the Second Amendment, Mack declared, “the government was forcing me to participate in a gun control scheme that I knew was unconstitutional. When all law enforcement is forced into that position by state or federal legislators, which one do we side with? And I believe there is a proper way to conduct oneself in knowing the difference between enforcing stupid laws and enforcing the principles of the Constitution.”
Mack described the similarity of the cops in Alabama who with no conscience enforced unconstitutional segregation laws against Rosa Parks, and the Gestapo in Nazi Germany who committed genocide. “The cop who arrested Rosa Parks said, the law is the law.’ The officers at Nuremberg said the same thing, ‘We were just following orders.’ Well the court determined that following orders when you’re committing a crime, or genocide, doesn’t cut it. We say the same thing. Do not say, ‘I’m just following orders.’ Do what’s right. We stand for people being abused. I don’t care if it’s gun rights, land rights, Amish rights, the federal government should not get a free pass and we should stand against their abuses.”
Mack was strictly confident while exclaiming “I have never advocated violence. I spent 20 years in law enforcement without ever beating up anybody.” But “when you have no place else to go, when all the courts are against you, all the legislators are against you, where else do you go? I believe to the local county sheriff…and if that means standing against the federal government, then so damn be it.”
Like-minded sheriffs have made their presence felt at two of the recent conflicts in the constitutional battles between the federal government and local ranchers. The Bundy ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada and then in Burns, Oregon to represent the victimized Hammond family at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in Oregon. The federal government sent their emotionless just doing my job mob to take control over public land near both of the ranches. Mack wrote on the CSPOA website, “Most Americans think that federal authority is ever most powerful and can usurp any governing entity below it. Though somewhat logical, that is simply a fallacy when one would consult the constitution. It is not the job of the federal government to interpose between you and the local law, it is your local government that will interpose.”
Back in February, the CSPOA began a nationwide campaign titled “Vet Your Sheriff,” and authored a “Sheriff Survey” to be presented to local sheriffs to validate their stance on the constitution and get a feel for their view of Freedom.
Question 9 asks, “According to the principles of our Constitutional Republic, who is responsible for keeping the Federal Government in check?”
Question number 4 asks, “Should the Federal Government come into your county and serve warrants and make arrests without informing you first of their intentions?”
Justin Nix, a criminology professor at the University of Louisville said, “It’s terrifying to me.” Nix, who specializes in police legitimacy and procedural fairness continued, “It’s not up to the police to decide what the law is going to be. They’re sworn to uphold the law. It’s not up to them to pick and choose.” Nix gave in and complained that police officers use discretion all the time in choosing to charge citizens with a crime or not. Ignorantly uninformed that the discretion is one-sided and based on revenue collection. Nix then bemoaned, “But to be on the record, that you don’t want officers enforcing laws, that is pretty bold.”
Sheriff Mack gave a speech Virginia a few weeks ago at a town hall meeting where he shared the stage with of the president of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, Philip Van Cleave. Van Cleave joked, “What a horrible thing it is, asking the sheriff to honor the Constitution.” He then said that both federal and state laws have been passed that deliberately violate the Constitution, and “if we ignore them, then the government can do whatever they want. It’s chaos out there, without somebody putting boundaries in and honoring that those boundaries mean something.” With sheriff’s joining the CSPOA and teaming up with the likes of Mack, Arpaio, and Palmer, we just might have enough of a swing to hack at the roots of evil. The branches are being clipped and sometimes plucked but they can always grow back.
By Andre’ Gabriel Esparza – DontComply.com
A Pro Liberty, Pro Freedom, Human Rights Activist, very involved in a wide variety of Activism and Exposing the Truth at all costs.
Pingback: Sheriffs to ignore laws which contradict Constitution and Bill of Rights - Guardians of the 2nd Amendment()
NO! a bunch of righteous people who are tired of Federal encroachments. It’s your wing nuts that will be squashed. It’s time to awake a beat the whore. When the righteous rule there is harmony, but when he wicked rule there is discontent. Proverbs I believe.
A bunch of wing nuts who will squashed.
Find Us On Facebook
Enter your email address to subscribe!