El Paso County Colorado Sheriff Maketa showing he's PRO-2A

[theGinsue]

My Sheriff, Sheriff Maketa of El Paso County, made a great statement yesterday showing his 2A support



COLORADO SPRINGS, COLO. -- El Paso County Sheriff Terry Maketa is speaking out following the school shooting in Newtown last month.


He is offering to work with local school districts if they ever decide to arm teachers and administrators.


Sheriff Maketa believes arming qualified teachers and administrators is not a bad idea.


He said his office is even willing to train school officials, and waive the charge for concealed weapons permits.


"What we are really combating is the fear of crime, and the fear of a delayed response," Maketa said.


Maketa said he has supported the idea of arming teachers and administrators for years, long before the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary.


But this is the first time he has offered to waive the concealed carry fees for local districts.


"If they were permitted it would at least have a deterrent effect, if the school district made it known they had armed people inside the schools to protect the children," Maketa said.


He said armed staff members can also respond to incidents until law enforcement arrives.


When it comes to regulating and banning guns, Maketa said that is not the answer as the country saw in Connecticut.


"There is a state that has tight gun control and registration, and an individual went into a school and took lives," he said.


So far the sheriff has not had any of the local districts reach out to him, but that does not mean they never will.


Falcon District 49's school board just voted in favor of allowing the district's safety and emergency coordinator to obtain a concealed carry permit.


"That discussion had been happening for awhile, before the most recent shooting," Stephanie Wurtz, Spokesperson for District 49, said. " But of course it brought it back into the forefront."


Right now Wurtz said there is no talk of arming D-49 teachers and administrators.


She said the district is confident with the security measures it currently has in place.


"We are certainly open to any other programs that might be out there for school safety, including anything from the sheriff's office," Wurtz said.


Currently under the Gun-Free School Zones Act guns are not allowed in schools unless carried by law enforcement or security personnel.

[Zundfolge]

Sheriff Maketa has always been one of the good ones. As Sheriff Anderson's undersheriff I believe he developed El Paso county's Shall Issue CCW system back when the state of CO was May Issue.


That said, I'd really appreciate it if he'd come out as forcefully as the Sheriffs in Kentucky and Oregon that have flatly said they will not enforce the new gun control.

[Flatline]

Apparently he wants to bear that cost by increasing taxes, just saying.

[Tinelement]

Awesome!!

[HoneyBadger]

I never heard back from the email I sent him last week. :(

[hammer03]

That last line is wrong, under the Gun Free School Zone Act, anyone licensed to carry can carry on campuses. Colorado law is what is stopping us from protecting ourselves and our children while they are at school. (ccw holders at least)

(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;

[Teufelhund]

Many, many Sheriffs across the country have publicly stated they will not comply with, enforce, nor allow enforcement by Federal agencies of any new AWB legislation.

In fact here is a list, copied from a running list being maintained on the Oath Keepers national forums, of the Sheriffs who have so far made such a Statement. Current as of 1/21/13:


1. Jackson County, Kentucky Sheriff Denny Peyman
2. Linn County, Oregon Sheriff Tim Mueller
3. Madison County, Idaho Sheriff Roy Klingler
4. Crook County, Oregon Sheriff Jim Hensley
5. Douglas County, Oregon Sheriff John Hanlin
6. Curry County, Oregon Sheriff John Bishop
7. Livingston County, Missouri Sheriff Steve Cox
8. Smith County, Texas Sheriff Larry Smith
9. Josephine County, Sheriff Gil Gilbertson
10. Madison County, Alabama Sheriff Blake Dorning
11. Larimer County, Colorado Sheriff Justin Smith
12. Charleston County, South Carolina Sheriff Al Cannon
13. Morgan County, Alabama Sheriff Ana Franklin
14. Houston County, Alabama Sheriff Andy Hughes
15. Gilmer County, Georgia Sheriff Stacy Nicholson
16. Pine County, Minnesota Sheriff Robin Cole
17. Grant County, Oregon, Sheriff Glenn Palmer
18. Coos County, Oregon Sheriff Craig Zanni
19. Johnson County, Missouri Sheriff Charles Heiss
20. Martin County, Florida Sheriff Bill Snyder
21. Siskiyou County, Califorhia Sheriff Jon Lopey
22. Humboldt County, Nevada Sheriff Ed Kilgpore
23. Stanislaus County, California Sheriff Adam Christianson
24. Lawrence County, Missouri Sheriff Bard DeLay
25. Shasta County, California Sheriff Tom Bosenko
26. El Dorado County, California Sheriff John D'Agostini
27. Tehama County, California Sheriff David Hencraft
28. Lassen County, California Sheriff Dean Growden
29. Del Norte County, California Sheriff Dean Wilson
30. Modoc County, California Sheriff Mike Poindexter
31. Mendocino County, California Sheriff Thomas Allman
32. Plumas County, California Sheriff Greg Hagwood
33. Humboldt County, California Sheriff Mike Downey
34. Canyon County Idaho Sheriff Kieran Donahue
35. Fresno County, California Sheriff Margaret Mims
36. Washington County, Oregon Sheriff Pat Garrett
37. Multnomah County, Washington Sheriff Dan Staton
38. Yavapai County, Arizona Sheriff Scott Mascher
39. Boone County, Ohio Sheriff Micahel A. Helmig,
40. Clermont County, Ohio Sheriff A.J. Rodenberg
41. Maricopa County, Ariznona Sheriff Joe Arpaio
42. El Paso County, Colorado Sheriff Terry Maketa
43. Weld County, Colorado Sheriff John Cooke
44. Oconee County, Georgia Sheriff Scott Berry
45. Johnson County, Missouri Sheriff Frank Denning
46. Mesa County Colorado Sheriff Stan Hilke
47. Collin County Texas Sheriff Terry Box
48. Spartanburg County, South Carolina Sheriff Chuck Wright
49. Transylvania County NC David Mahoney
50. Utah County Sheriff's Association
51. Canadian County, OK Sheriff Randall Edwards
52. Beaufort County NC, (nullification of any gun laws)
53. Ellis County, Texas Sheriff Johnny Brown
54. Hays County, Texas Sheriff Gary Cutler
55. Moore County, Texas Sheriff James DeArmond
56. Concho County, Texas Sheriff Richard Doane
57. Shackelford County, Texas Sheriff Edward Miller
58. Randall County, Texas Sheriff Joel Richardson
59. Hartley County, Texas Sheriff Franky Scott
60. DeWitt County, Texas Sheriff Joe Zavesky
61. Kimble County, Texas Sheriff Hilario Cantu
62. Kendall County, Texas Sheriff Al Auxier
63. Coke County, Texas Sheriff Wayne McCutchen
64. Burnet County, Texas Sheriff W. T. Smith

As far as I know, we have not yet heard from Sheriff Robinson of Arapahoe County on this matter. Here is my letter to him, requesting he make his position known.


Dear Sheriff Robinson,

As you are surely aware, Congress intends to introduce renewed legislation which bans the sale, transfer, and ownership of certain types of weapons based on cosmetic features, as well as magazines which hold more than ten rounds. You are also surely aware that many Sheriffs in various counties across the country have publicly stated, including sending letters directly to VP Biden, that they will not comply with laws such as this proposed legislation which infringe upon the people's right to keep and bear arms. Not only will these Sheriffs not enforce such laws, but they will not allow Federal agencies to enforce such laws within their respective counties.

I am a Marine Corps veteran, American patriot, and a resident of Arapahoe County. I took an Oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of these united States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that oath did not expire upon my Honorable Discharge. I would like to know where my Sheriff and his department stand on this issue. Do you intend to join with these other Sheriffs, including Sheriff Maketa of El Paso County, Sheriff Cooke of Weld County, and Sheriff Smith of Larimer County, to uphold your Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution of these united States? I do hope and expect this is in fact your intention. Please make it publicly known to the people of Arapahoe County and the State and Federal legislators that you will not comply with legislation which infringes upon the Second Amendment to the Constitution, nor allow Federal agencies to enforce such legislation in Arapahoe County, and please do so at your earliest convenience. We will stand with you at all costs to defend our inherent rights. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
XXXXX


I suggest if you have not heard from your own Sheriff, it is time to reach out to them and ask they make a stand.

[Melvin]

Don't hold your breath thinking you will see Jeffco or Park Co on that list.

[Gcompact30]

Well Pueblo County is not on that list, guess we better find a GOOD person to run against our current Sheriff in the next election that believes in the Constitution and willing to serve the people of Pueblo County.

[Teufelhund]

I received a response from Sheriff Robinson within minutes of sending my letter to him. There was no text in the email, just a letter from the Sheriff, attached as a .pdf.

Suffice to say he will not join the ranks of those posted above. He will enforce any law handed down unless it is deemed unconstitutional by the Judicial branch of the government.

It is a three-page letter. Here is the relevant part to answer the question at hand:


Although I have great respect and admiration for each of my colleague Sheriffs and police
chiefs across the country, I take exception with the handful of public servants who have
Suggested that they would reject enforcement of any “unconstitutional mandates,”
specifically related to the Second Amendment. The rhetoric, of the few, related to these
significant constitutional issues has been interpreted by many who believe that a person
in a position of authority might be able to deteirnine the constitutionality of an issue. If
an issue were to be arbitrarily deemed “unconstitutional,” the decision to curtail further
enforcement responsibilities would be in direct conflict with the concept of the balance of
powers, as defined by our founders. The principle of balance of powers demands a
system of checks and balances, accomplished through the distinct and deliberate
separation of the authority and responsibilities of the three branches of government:
executive, legislative, and judicial. Public safety professionals serving in the executive
branch, do not have the constitutional authority, responsibility, and in most cases, the
credentials to determine the constitutionality of any issue. The authority and
responsibility to determine the legality and/or constitutionality of a matter is to be
accomplished by the judicial branch, as clearly deiined in the Constitution. For a public
safety professional to suggest that they can determine the constitutionality of an issue and
establish public policy based upon that ill-conceived notion, would be tantamount to a
peace officer arresting an individual, deciding guilt and sentencing the individual to
incarceration in the county jail. This is not how our principle based, constitutional
system functions - WE ARE A NATION OF LAWS.

Here is the .pdf if you're interested.

19995

[centrarchidae]

Don't hold your breath thinking you will see Jeffco or Park Co on that list.

Fred Wegener has already emailed at least one person here (might have been that other site) to say that he's on the side of the good guys.

Did anybody else notice, TWELVE sheriffs from California? None from LA, Marin, Contra Costa, SF, Sonoma, etc, but still!

[Brock Landers]

I'm glad to see these sheriffs supporting the second amendment but I don't think this is the way to do it. The issues I see with this approach are twofold.

First, no one knows what this potential legislation is. How does it make any sense to come out against legislation that doesn't even exist yet? Further, I still see the chances of any legislation passing as slim to nil with the House under Republican control and several Democrats unlikely to support an AWB anyway.

Second, as pointed out very effectively by Mr. Robinson above, sheriffs have no power to determine the constitutionality of laws. These issues are for courts to decide and sheriffs to enforce. I see a lot of potential problems with individual sheriffs from county to county deciding that they have the authority to declare laws "unconstitutional."

The second amendment states that:


A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

So, now that we have sheriffs providing their own personal interpretations of the Constitution, what happens when we get New York and Massachusetts sheriffs requiring gun-owners to register and join "well regulated militias" in order to keep their guns? Conversely, maybe we get a local sheriff who goes a little overboard on the "shall not be infringed" and decides to legalize private ownership of WMD. Need some VX gas to protect your family? Talk to my guy Stanley Goodspeed. History buff mixed up with the wrong people? I think I saw some guys down on Colfax slingin' mustard gas. Maybe you've got a lot of money and you really want to make a statement? I can hook you up with an old Soviet briefcase nuke, but you'll need an NFA stamp for that one.

I recognize the absurdity in both scenarios, but I think the point is made. I expect (and obviously hope) that this is all moot anyway, since I don't see an AWB passing again, but I just don't like the idea of elected officials treading on the judicial branch by making their own determinations on Constitutional issues.

[Byte Stryke]

I'm not a veterinarian, but I know road-kill when I See it.

The Sheriffs stating that they will not enforce unconstitutional laws is allot like that. It Doesn't take a triple doctorate in Constitutional law and an appointment to the SCOTUS to know that gun confiscation is not constitutional.
Stating that they will not be pawns in a government power-grab is something to be thankful for.
I align these men with the Oathkeepers. I am sure a few are Members

I bet a few million Jews wish Guards had not simply "followed orders"
Or how about Pol Pot- Khmer Rouge
or Mao Tse Tung-PRC
How about the United States 1492-~1890, 1942, or even as recently as February 1993