Firing Sheriffs Who Won’t Enforce Federal Gun Bans

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Supporters of the 380 sheriffs in 15 states who so far have vowed to defy new state and federal gun control laws claim that legislation is starting to pop up around the nation to fire any state elected or appointed law enforcement official who doesn’t obey federal orders.

The first effort emerged in Texas. Legislation proposed by Dallas Democratic Rep. Yvonne Davis would remove any sheriff or law enforcement officer who refuses to enforce state or federal laws.

What’s more, it would remove any elected or appointed law enforcement officer for simply stating or signing any document stating that they will not obey federal orders.

A gun lobbyist told Secrets, “Beware because once something like this is introduced in one state, it will be followed very quickly in several other states.”

Secrets has charted the growing group of sheriffs opposed to new gun control initiatives. They argue that citizens should be allowed by buy the types of weapons they want to defend themselves. They also claim that there is no way to tell the difference between old rifle and pistol magazines and new ones that President Obama wants to ban.


  1. No one can force sheriffs to enforce federal law.

    We already have a SCOTUS decision on that.

    Considering the massive civil liability that occurs when the feds go all ‘cowboy’ as in Waco or Ruby Ridge, state & local LEOs are wise to stay as far away as possible from any federal “gun grabs”.

  2. What about police/politicians who refuse to obey the Highest Law in the Land? You know, they took an oath to obey the Constitution… the oath where they put their hand on the Bible and swore to obey the Constitution? What happens to the president, vice president, police and others who refuse to obey THAT law? Will they be hung/impeached/or whatever? since its the HIGHEST law in the land and any legislation which is passed in invalid if it goes against the Constitution… what happens to the m–f–ers who disobey THIS law?

    • It depends.. If the motherfuckers you’re talking about is you are I? The answer is simple, we go the fuck to jail and lose everything we own. If the motherfuckers is them, they get rich and do more of it.

    • Hi Grasshopper,

      Here’s their out:

      The written document is not – for all practical purposes – the Constitution. It is subsequent rulings about what the Constitution meant or intended. “Case law.”

      The written Constitution is null and void. If this were not true, then one could challenge laws which have placed onerous restrictions on the (ex) constitutionally unrestricted right to keep and bear arms… the unreasonable searches and seizures without any specific probable cause that have become routine (as well as legal) … the abridgement of the (ex) right of free association… speech… and so on.

      And win in court.

      But everyone knows you’d lose in court. We already have lost.

      The law of the land is what those who interpret it – and then interpret their interpretations – claim it is.

      In other words, there is no law – other than the whim of those in power, backed by power.

  3. Wouldn’t this create a bit of a quandary for states that have so-called “sanctuary cities”? Immigration is still federal law, after all.

    • Just like with marijuana laws, “they” will only enforce what they choose (anything that threatens the status quo). I think we can rest assured that the illegals they are training to be their pawns will continue to live off the tax dollars us honest people have to work for.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here