HoneyBadger
06-04-2013, 14:32
Sheriff Maketa just posted this up on Facebook. While I can't speak for you poor Denverites, this makes me a little more optimistic.
There were several questions that were not answered at last weeks fundraiser. I wanted to take a few moments and answer some of the questions that came in:
Q: What are the effects of Senate Bill 13-013 allowing the Secret Service powers in our State:
A: This is a bill proposed by the Colorado Senate to recognize members of the Secret Service as Peace Officers under Colorado law. This law has very little if any impact on the Office of Sheriff. There are circumstances where it may be advantageous to those agents and local law enforcement. This law extends peace officer status in a very limited capacity. The bill itself clearly sets those limitations. Some have expressed concern this could be the Federal Governments' attempt to prosecute local law enforcement who refuse to honor presidential directives and I do not believe that to be the case. Based on the language in the bill, past decisions of The US Supreme Court and Colorado Law, I just do not see this bill granting any additional special powers or even powers that equal local law enforcement peace officers to secret service members. I did not endorse this bill because I have not been presented the specific needs to make this change.
********************************************
Q: Do you have any plans to run for any future political office:
A: At this time I personally do not have any plans to run for a future political office.
********************************************
Q: Do the Sheriff’s plan on defending citizens if the Federal Government attempts to remove our firearms?
A: We cannot speak for all Sheriff’s, however, no government entity has the authority over the constitutional rights of a citizen. I will uphold my oath.
********************************************
Q: I’ve read online media sources that if there are enough signatures to recall Senator Morse there is a plan to have him resign and have a Democratic replacement appointed. If so, how will the affect momentum in revoking anti-gun progress?
A: I do not believe it will have any direct impact on the progress of the lawsuit.
*********************************************
Q: How is the recall of Senator Morse coming?
A: The recall effort is moving along well. They have double the signatures needed. The next step is to have those signatures validated by the State. We will keep you updated as we get more information.
*********************************************
Q: Surrendering firearms/transfers of arms: Who can accept the transfer of firearms? Can there be a “co-ownership” of firearms? What can we expect if stopped in the possession of a high capacity magazine?
A: There can be “co-ownership” of a firearm, but it does depend on how the courts rule. Firearms are property and this is a point brought forward in the lawsuit, as this is a very vague law. Marital law does not distinguish what that property is and we feel this point can easily be challenged. Transfers can occur between immediate family members (spouses, parents children, grandchild, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, uncles). If you are contacted by law enforcement and are in possession of a high capacity magazine, there is a chance law enfrocement may not question you at all. However, if a law enforcement officer were to ask you about the history or ownership of the magazine, you should be prepared to provide details regarding when you purchased it. Remember, those magazines purchased/owned prior to July 1, 2013, are not effected by the legislation.
**********************************************
Q: Why do these politicians not recognize that the criminals will not obey the law and law abiding citizens will be defenseless?
A: We have made this argument many times and have presented factual data supporting our position to the legislature to no avail.
There were several questions that were not answered at last weeks fundraiser. I wanted to take a few moments and answer some of the questions that came in:
Q: What are the effects of Senate Bill 13-013 allowing the Secret Service powers in our State:
A: This is a bill proposed by the Colorado Senate to recognize members of the Secret Service as Peace Officers under Colorado law. This law has very little if any impact on the Office of Sheriff. There are circumstances where it may be advantageous to those agents and local law enforcement. This law extends peace officer status in a very limited capacity. The bill itself clearly sets those limitations. Some have expressed concern this could be the Federal Governments' attempt to prosecute local law enforcement who refuse to honor presidential directives and I do not believe that to be the case. Based on the language in the bill, past decisions of The US Supreme Court and Colorado Law, I just do not see this bill granting any additional special powers or even powers that equal local law enforcement peace officers to secret service members. I did not endorse this bill because I have not been presented the specific needs to make this change.
********************************************
Q: Do you have any plans to run for any future political office:
A: At this time I personally do not have any plans to run for a future political office.
********************************************
Q: Do the Sheriff’s plan on defending citizens if the Federal Government attempts to remove our firearms?
A: We cannot speak for all Sheriff’s, however, no government entity has the authority over the constitutional rights of a citizen. I will uphold my oath.
********************************************
Q: I’ve read online media sources that if there are enough signatures to recall Senator Morse there is a plan to have him resign and have a Democratic replacement appointed. If so, how will the affect momentum in revoking anti-gun progress?
A: I do not believe it will have any direct impact on the progress of the lawsuit.
*********************************************
Q: How is the recall of Senator Morse coming?
A: The recall effort is moving along well. They have double the signatures needed. The next step is to have those signatures validated by the State. We will keep you updated as we get more information.
*********************************************
Q: Surrendering firearms/transfers of arms: Who can accept the transfer of firearms? Can there be a “co-ownership” of firearms? What can we expect if stopped in the possession of a high capacity magazine?
A: There can be “co-ownership” of a firearm, but it does depend on how the courts rule. Firearms are property and this is a point brought forward in the lawsuit, as this is a very vague law. Marital law does not distinguish what that property is and we feel this point can easily be challenged. Transfers can occur between immediate family members (spouses, parents children, grandchild, nieces, nephews, first cousins, aunts, uncles). If you are contacted by law enforcement and are in possession of a high capacity magazine, there is a chance law enfrocement may not question you at all. However, if a law enforcement officer were to ask you about the history or ownership of the magazine, you should be prepared to provide details regarding when you purchased it. Remember, those magazines purchased/owned prior to July 1, 2013, are not effected by the legislation.
**********************************************
Q: Why do these politicians not recognize that the criminals will not obey the law and law abiding citizens will be defenseless?
A: We have made this argument many times and have presented factual data supporting our position to the legislature to no avail.