Post by Fed Up Jen on Feb 4, 2013 17:45:45 GMT -10
Gun control debate reveals rift among sheriffs
By St. Louis Post-Dispatch February 4, 2013 12:20 pm
LINN, Mo. - The new sheriff of Osage County stood waiting to cross Main Street in this town without a stop light when a Chevy pickup stopped in front of him. The sheriff didn't recognize the driver. But someone clearly recognized Sheriff Michael Dixon in his crisp white shirt and bronze star. The window rolled down.
"Thank you for standing up for my Second Amendment rights!" the driver shouted, giving a friendly wave before pulling away.
"I literally can't go anywhere without someone thanking me for taking a stand," Dixon said as he reached his office here, about two hours west of St. Louis.
Dixon has seen his profile soar locally and beyond since he joined the growing number of sheriffs across the nation who have loudly -- and at times angrily -- denounced potential new federal gun control laws. Some sheriffs have vowed to ignore any new restrictions they judge to be unconstitutional. In doing so, they have staked out unusually public stances in the nation's polarizing debate over guns that followed December's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.
The Utah Sheriffs' Association warned that "we are prepared to trade our lives" for the Second Amendment. A sheriff in Canton, Ga., said he might stop federal authorities from enforcing new gun laws. In Marshall, Ill., a sheriff took to Facebook to proclaim, "no man made law can take away a person's God given right to defend themself!" And Dixon issued a news release noting he took an oath to the Constitution, "but unlike Obama, I intend to uphold mine."
Statements such as these have gained plenty of attention. And they have been seized upon as proof that, depending on the view, these sheriffs are either protecting the Constitution -- or threatening to undermine it.
GOING TOO FAR?
An estimated 100 to 200 sheriffs so far have aired gun control objections, a small and mostly rural minority in a nation with more than 3,000 sheriffs. Still, the president of the National Sheriffs' Association called the trend "worrisome." And sheriffs such as Oliver "Glenn" Boyer in Jefferson County think their colleagues have gone too far.
"We've got a little bit of the sky is falling," Boyer said. "We've played right into the hands of the far right, and now the far left is going to react."
In Arapahoe County, Colo., home to last July's mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Sheriff Grayson Robinson issued a letter criticizing sheriffs who claim they have a responsibility to flaunt laws they feel are unconstitutional. He said he supported gun rights. But he dismissively compared the other sheriffs' actions to arresting someone, deciding guilt and handing down a sentence.
The sheriffs who have voiced their objections said they simply were responding to residents scared about gun rights. Lawrence County Sheriff Brad DeLay said people in southwestern Missouri called his office daily "in a panic or fear mode that federal agents are coming to take their guns." DeLay doesn't discount that happening, either. Such a scenario, he said, "is a possibility if people don't stand up."
In Osage County, Dixon said a growing fear seemed to be behind the rush of visitors to his office seeking concealed carry weapon permits.
"It opened my eyes to the depths of the concern," Dixon said.
Dixon and DeLay were among several Missouri sheriffs who signed onto a letter sent to President Barack Obama that reads, "Any attempt to restrict these Second Amendment rights through executive order is unconstitutional and tantamount to an all-out assault on the United States Constitution."
The letter describes a society without firearms as ripe for victimization and oppression, pointing to Syria and North Korea. And it closes with a call for other sheriffs "to rise to the defense and aid of all Americans" if federal officials try to enforce a law that diminishes the right to bear arms.
Chuck Heiss wrote that letter. He is sheriff in Johnson County, in western Missouri. He said he was motivated by the gun control proposals announced by the White House on Jan. 16. He then sent his letter to every sheriff in the state.
Heiss said he welcomed a debate about curbing mass shootings. But he doesn't believe the answer is banning assault weapons or limiting the size of ammunition magazines. He said the mental health system was the problem. Guns are part of life in the sparsely populated county of 830 square miles.
"It's a very different issue in rural areas," Heiss said.
But he said he supported closing the so-called gun show loophole that allows gun buyers to avoid background checks if they buy from private sellers. Dixon, too, said he supported this. And both sheriffs acknowledged they would enforce gun laws passed by Congress and upheld by the courts. They were more concerned about executive orders banning guns, though Obama has not issued any.
"Nothing in my letter said I was going to flat-out refuse to enforce the law of the land," Heiss said.
JUDGING THE LAW
That's not how Richard Mack sees the fight.
He is a former Arizona sheriff turned gun rights crusader. Calling himself "Sheriff Mack," he gives talks, writes books and runs the Texas-based Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. He keeps an online tally of sheriffs who "have risen up all over our great nation to stand up against the unconstitutional control measures being taken."
Mack likes to say that sheriffs take an oath to the Constitution, not to laws.
But county sheriffs do not have the authority to say whether a law is constitutional, said Gregory Magarian, a law professor at Washington University. If Congress passes a law, it can be challenged in court. But law enforcement officials are bound by the law.
"What the sheriffs are doing is ridiculous," Magarian said.
Larry Amerson has watched all this unfold from his sheriff's office in Calhoun County, Ala. Amerson, the president of the National Sheriffs' Association, sounded a bit weary discussing the rift over gun control. He said the sheriffs were singling out one aspect of the Constitution -- the Second Amendment -- and ignoring the rest. He compared it to basing all your beliefs on just one verse in the Bible.
He sees their arguments as opening the door to deputies' defying the federal government and skipping the courts to settle legal disagreements.
"That's where my worry comes in," Amerson said.
Last week, the sheriffs association passed a resolution that read like a reaction to the controversy. The group said that it "supports the rights conferred by the Second Amendment and further recognizes the ultimate authority of the courts in interpreting the scope of those constitutional rights." The group had supported the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.
Amerson thinks people are being stirred up by talk of "jack-booted thugs" seeking to disarm Americans. He's heard the comparisons to Nazi Germany and the whispers about secret United Nations treaties. He thinks it's nonsense.
"There is so much anger and bitterness on the national level that it's resulting in a lack of security for individuals," Amerson said. "People are feeding on that fear."
'MR. AND MRS. AMERICA'
Dixon is still adjusting to his new digs in the Osage County sheriff's office. Framed certificates hang on the walls. On a bookshelf sits a photo of him and his wife posing by one of the president's armored limousines, a visit arranged by a friend during a trip to Washington. His new business cards rest in a silver holder shaped like the White House.
Dixon is 26. He was elected sheriff in November after a brief stint as police chief in nearby Belle.
Sitting at his desk, Dixon said he decided to make his stand on gun control after reading Heiss' letter and hearing from county residents. He investigated the topic on his own, too.
To prove his point, he pulled up a YouTube clip. It was taken from a 1995 interview with U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein. The Democratic senator from California was talking to "60 Minutes" about why the 1994 assault weapons ban didn't go further. What she said nearly two decades ago has now become legend among people at one end of the divisive debate on guns. Feinstein said that if she thought the Senate could have passed an outright ban, "?'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
Dixon turned from his monitor.
"That's what people, everyday folks, that's what they are worried about," he said.
Feinstein's current gun-control proposal goes no further than the 1994 law. Still, even the sheriff doesn't believe federal agents are coming for everyone's guns.
"But I can tell you," Dixon said, "a large amount of people I represent do. In growing numbers."
By St. Louis Post-Dispatch February 4, 2013 12:20 pm
LINN, Mo. - The new sheriff of Osage County stood waiting to cross Main Street in this town without a stop light when a Chevy pickup stopped in front of him. The sheriff didn't recognize the driver. But someone clearly recognized Sheriff Michael Dixon in his crisp white shirt and bronze star. The window rolled down.
"Thank you for standing up for my Second Amendment rights!" the driver shouted, giving a friendly wave before pulling away.
"I literally can't go anywhere without someone thanking me for taking a stand," Dixon said as he reached his office here, about two hours west of St. Louis.
Dixon has seen his profile soar locally and beyond since he joined the growing number of sheriffs across the nation who have loudly -- and at times angrily -- denounced potential new federal gun control laws. Some sheriffs have vowed to ignore any new restrictions they judge to be unconstitutional. In doing so, they have staked out unusually public stances in the nation's polarizing debate over guns that followed December's mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.
The Utah Sheriffs' Association warned that "we are prepared to trade our lives" for the Second Amendment. A sheriff in Canton, Ga., said he might stop federal authorities from enforcing new gun laws. In Marshall, Ill., a sheriff took to Facebook to proclaim, "no man made law can take away a person's God given right to defend themself!" And Dixon issued a news release noting he took an oath to the Constitution, "but unlike Obama, I intend to uphold mine."
Statements such as these have gained plenty of attention. And they have been seized upon as proof that, depending on the view, these sheriffs are either protecting the Constitution -- or threatening to undermine it.
GOING TOO FAR?
An estimated 100 to 200 sheriffs so far have aired gun control objections, a small and mostly rural minority in a nation with more than 3,000 sheriffs. Still, the president of the National Sheriffs' Association called the trend "worrisome." And sheriffs such as Oliver "Glenn" Boyer in Jefferson County think their colleagues have gone too far.
"We've got a little bit of the sky is falling," Boyer said. "We've played right into the hands of the far right, and now the far left is going to react."
In Arapahoe County, Colo., home to last July's mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora, Sheriff Grayson Robinson issued a letter criticizing sheriffs who claim they have a responsibility to flaunt laws they feel are unconstitutional. He said he supported gun rights. But he dismissively compared the other sheriffs' actions to arresting someone, deciding guilt and handing down a sentence.
The sheriffs who have voiced their objections said they simply were responding to residents scared about gun rights. Lawrence County Sheriff Brad DeLay said people in southwestern Missouri called his office daily "in a panic or fear mode that federal agents are coming to take their guns." DeLay doesn't discount that happening, either. Such a scenario, he said, "is a possibility if people don't stand up."
In Osage County, Dixon said a growing fear seemed to be behind the rush of visitors to his office seeking concealed carry weapon permits.
"It opened my eyes to the depths of the concern," Dixon said.
Dixon and DeLay were among several Missouri sheriffs who signed onto a letter sent to President Barack Obama that reads, "Any attempt to restrict these Second Amendment rights through executive order is unconstitutional and tantamount to an all-out assault on the United States Constitution."
The letter describes a society without firearms as ripe for victimization and oppression, pointing to Syria and North Korea. And it closes with a call for other sheriffs "to rise to the defense and aid of all Americans" if federal officials try to enforce a law that diminishes the right to bear arms.
Chuck Heiss wrote that letter. He is sheriff in Johnson County, in western Missouri. He said he was motivated by the gun control proposals announced by the White House on Jan. 16. He then sent his letter to every sheriff in the state.
Heiss said he welcomed a debate about curbing mass shootings. But he doesn't believe the answer is banning assault weapons or limiting the size of ammunition magazines. He said the mental health system was the problem. Guns are part of life in the sparsely populated county of 830 square miles.
"It's a very different issue in rural areas," Heiss said.
But he said he supported closing the so-called gun show loophole that allows gun buyers to avoid background checks if they buy from private sellers. Dixon, too, said he supported this. And both sheriffs acknowledged they would enforce gun laws passed by Congress and upheld by the courts. They were more concerned about executive orders banning guns, though Obama has not issued any.
"Nothing in my letter said I was going to flat-out refuse to enforce the law of the land," Heiss said.
JUDGING THE LAW
That's not how Richard Mack sees the fight.
He is a former Arizona sheriff turned gun rights crusader. Calling himself "Sheriff Mack," he gives talks, writes books and runs the Texas-based Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association. He keeps an online tally of sheriffs who "have risen up all over our great nation to stand up against the unconstitutional control measures being taken."
Mack likes to say that sheriffs take an oath to the Constitution, not to laws.
But county sheriffs do not have the authority to say whether a law is constitutional, said Gregory Magarian, a law professor at Washington University. If Congress passes a law, it can be challenged in court. But law enforcement officials are bound by the law.
"What the sheriffs are doing is ridiculous," Magarian said.
Larry Amerson has watched all this unfold from his sheriff's office in Calhoun County, Ala. Amerson, the president of the National Sheriffs' Association, sounded a bit weary discussing the rift over gun control. He said the sheriffs were singling out one aspect of the Constitution -- the Second Amendment -- and ignoring the rest. He compared it to basing all your beliefs on just one verse in the Bible.
He sees their arguments as opening the door to deputies' defying the federal government and skipping the courts to settle legal disagreements.
"That's where my worry comes in," Amerson said.
Last week, the sheriffs association passed a resolution that read like a reaction to the controversy. The group said that it "supports the rights conferred by the Second Amendment and further recognizes the ultimate authority of the courts in interpreting the scope of those constitutional rights." The group had supported the 1994 federal assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004.
Amerson thinks people are being stirred up by talk of "jack-booted thugs" seeking to disarm Americans. He's heard the comparisons to Nazi Germany and the whispers about secret United Nations treaties. He thinks it's nonsense.
"There is so much anger and bitterness on the national level that it's resulting in a lack of security for individuals," Amerson said. "People are feeding on that fear."
'MR. AND MRS. AMERICA'
Dixon is still adjusting to his new digs in the Osage County sheriff's office. Framed certificates hang on the walls. On a bookshelf sits a photo of him and his wife posing by one of the president's armored limousines, a visit arranged by a friend during a trip to Washington. His new business cards rest in a silver holder shaped like the White House.
Dixon is 26. He was elected sheriff in November after a brief stint as police chief in nearby Belle.
Sitting at his desk, Dixon said he decided to make his stand on gun control after reading Heiss' letter and hearing from county residents. He investigated the topic on his own, too.
To prove his point, he pulled up a YouTube clip. It was taken from a 1995 interview with U.S. Sen. Diane Feinstein. The Democratic senator from California was talking to "60 Minutes" about why the 1994 assault weapons ban didn't go further. What she said nearly two decades ago has now become legend among people at one end of the divisive debate on guns. Feinstein said that if she thought the Senate could have passed an outright ban, "?'Mr. and Mrs. America, turn 'em all in,' I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren't here."
Dixon turned from his monitor.
"That's what people, everyday folks, that's what they are worried about," he said.
Feinstein's current gun-control proposal goes no further than the 1994 law. Still, even the sheriff doesn't believe federal agents are coming for everyone's guns.
"But I can tell you," Dixon said, "a large amount of people I represent do. In growing numbers."
