In the wake
of the highly questionable surge in school shootings and the long-awaited
gun grabbing effort being promoted by the President, lawmakers,
and the mainstream media, hundreds of American sheriffs have now
gone on the record to state publicly that they will not enforce
any new gun laws such as the ones being proposed in the halls of
the U.S. Congress.
While the fact
that such grassroots political pressure exists in an amount that
would warrant such statement by sheriffs all across the country,
the fact also remains that many of these public officials are merely
cashing in on an exploitable situation to score political approval
from their constituents – political approval for a stance
they never intend to honor. This much is apparent to anyone who
is even a casual observer of political discourse or the development
of the overarching agenda inside the United States and elsewhere
in the world.
in point is Kershaw County Sheriff Jim Matthews.
Matthews’ conversion of Kershaw County into a virtual police
state, as well as his continued attack on all things free, should
thus have raised the suspicions as to the sincerity of many of
the sheriffs who had attached their names to the “Will Not
Enforce” list regarding the latest attempts at eliminating
the Second Amendment.
the positions and statements made by so many other sheriffs, Matthews
own position was much more tepid when it came to actually defending
Constitutional rights, a task which is clearly not the strong
suit of his department and administration.
Matthews’ position was that he was not “going to take
your guns,” is an eerily similar claim which was also made
by Barack Obama.
stated, "I’m not going to get rid of mine. I don’t
have a problem with assault weapon owners who follow the law. My
problem is with thugs who should be in jail who get their hands
at issue is the fact that if new gun laws are passed banning assault
weapons, assault weapons owners will no longer be following the
law. This is why Matthews and other sheriffs were asked the question
as to whether or not they would enforce such laws to begin with.
on to ask South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson for his opinion
on the coming Federal gun grab. Essentially, Matthews requested
AG Wilson to explain to him his responsibility as Sheriff when faced
with an unconstitutional law.
stated that he does not believe sheriffs can stop federal agents
from enforcing these laws in his jurisdiction.
lot of sheriffs want to be able to fall back on what the AG says
on what we lawfully have to do or don’t have to do,”
opinion has finally arrived. Unfortunately, it confirms the
weakness of state governments as well as the complete disregard
for Constitutional, civil, and human rights at the federal, state,
and local levels.
to Attorney General Wilson, if federal law enforcement officers
attempt to enforce unconstitutional gun laws or even confiscate
existing weapons, then neither state law nor state law enforcement
officials can stand in the way. Going further, Wilson suggests
that, if state or local law enforcement officials do attempt to
impede federal assaults on the rights of South Carolinians, these
state law enforcement officials would themselves be subject to
opinion goes even further than stating that state and local law
enforcement are unable to actually protect the rights of their
citizens from federal assaults, it claims that federal agents
are granted a type of immunity from state prosecution even if
they are clearly violating Constitutional rights.
states that “federal agents are immune from state prosecution
even when their conduct violated internal agency regulations or
exceeded their express authority.”
This means that an agent could come to your home, break into your
home, ransack the place, seize anything, all without a warrant
and he would be immune from state prosecution or even interference
with his ransacking.
Instead of protecting citizens sheriffs, with the AG’s blessing,
will stand down and let it happen. Matthews has been quoted saying
'I’m not going to take your guns' but he did not tell the
people he will instead stand by and watch as federal agents seize
weapons. In fact if a citizen was to refuse to give up his weapons
to federal agents the sheriff would be forced to protect that
federal agent from any action impeding the enforcement of federal
Yet, where Wilson’s
opinion truly falls apart is his statement “…that the
Department (Kershaw County Sheriff’s dept.) should neither
interfere with nor otherwise attempt to impede federal law enforcement
officers as they perform their lawful duties to enforce federal
laws, and who act necessary and proper within federal authority.”