There is nothing like having an enemy write an article intended to make you look stupid and the only thing it accomplishes is letting the public know you are doing a good job. That is what happened when the Propaganda and Criminals published what was intended to be a hit piece on Sheriff Al Cannon that turned into nothing more than their usual liberal whine and serves as proof Cannon is serving the public as he should. You can find it HERE if you are of a mind to. It was written by Andrew Knapp, whom we normally have a fairly decent opinion of. But you know what they say about "oh shits" and "attaboys", Andrew.
Here is the pull quote that tells you Cannon is doing his job, upholding the Constitution and warning the Feds of the possible consequences of their unlawful desires.
"But it’s an argument that some gun-control proponents and police
officials said stifles debate and helped snuff legislative efforts in
Washington. Invoking the Second Amendment without considering any
legislation, they said, doesn’t help address gun violence. Determining
that a new law is unconstitutional is a decision better left to the
courts, they said."
That is what is called a misleading statement, folks, and Andrew should be ashamed of himself. "Without considering legislation". Really? We seem to recall quite a bit of legislating going on up there in Washington - until sheriff's all over the country considered it, explained the ramifications and threatened, nay, promised, to arrest any federal agent who might try to enforce it. This resulted in the legislation going down in flames. The second and third sentences refer to "they", who are apparently the
unnamed advocates of gun control and some police officials referred to
in the paragraph in the article just prior to this one.
Awesome job, Sheriff!!! Keep stifling that debate. It is a debate we shouldn't even be having in light of what the Constitution emphatically states - "shall NOT be infringed". Everyone seems to be up in arms that sheriffs all over the country have been putting the Feds and idiot legislators on notice. Well, not everyone - just libtards, progressives and socialists. Liberal attorneys like Armand Derfner HATE that!
The article then goes on to point out that Chief Mullen of CPD supports some measures designed to infringe. Let's face it folks, Mullen is definitely no Greenburg. No matter what you thought of the former Chief of CPD he wouldn't hesitate to call a spade a spade. Mullen is the exact opposite and will only give you the opinion Joe Riley tells him to give you. Derfner, Mullen and the Propaganda and Criminals believe sheriffs and the rest of us should just shut the hell up and deal with whatever laws their idiot legislators pass.
Mullen cites papers and opinions issued by the International Association of Chiefs of Police supporting gun control. That alone tells you Mullen will regurgitate anything he is ordered to. The IACP is no friend of freedom. It is no secret the IACP has supported disarming citizens for decades now. They have supported just about every gun control measure ever proposed. They support the gun control agenda of the current Socialist in Chief. Of course, you already suspected that when the Propaganda and Criminals cited them. When their opposition to concealed carry in each individual state was ignored they simply lobbied to defeat the national carry law. You know, the one that would have allowed your South Carolina CCW to be recognized by every other state in the Union. Good thing all those Chiefs of Police are smarter than all you dummies who believe in protecting yourselves. You can read their latest position paper HERE.
Just a taste for you of what the IACP wants:
They want to make it illegal for anyone except law enforcement to buy/possess body armor - makes it easier to kill you when they decide to seriously violate the Constitution.
They are pushing for the "assault" weapon ban to be renewed.
They want the ATF to have the power to designate ammunition as "armor piercing" and regulate it. They don't think you should have it and want the sale of such ammunition banned - makes it harder for you to kill them when they decide to seriously violate the Constitution.
They oppose liberalization of CCW laws for EVERYONE, in EVERY state. They don't even want their active or retired officers to be able to carry concealed. In fact, they even oppose any suggestion that a duly trained and certified ACTIVE POLICE OFFICER be allowed to carry outside of his jurisdiction. How's that for fucking the troops? Nice to know your Chiefs think so highly of you folks.
They support a nationwide waiting period for firearms purchases.
They oppose the private sale of weapons between two consenting citizens.
They oppose any legislation that would interfere with investigations into firearms trafficking. Except, of course, interference with any type of congressional investigation into firearms trafficking operations by the government like Fast and Furious. They don't mind the stalling, obstruction and lying going on in that one.
They want Congress to overturn the Tiahrt Amendment, which prevents the government from releasing confidential law enforcement data on gun owners (you know, the data they say they don't collect) to anti-gun organizations for use in questionable studies or for use by government entities and others in lawsuits.
They want to initiate micro-stamping, an expensive laser technology which would embed a serial number on any cartridge fired from you weapon. Of course, you will have to pay for it. Like firearms aren't expensive enough already.
Yep, just a harmless organization of police chiefs. Nothing to see here. Move along.
The article mentioned Dorchester County Sheriff L.C. Knight, a former SLED agent, who didn't have the balls to take a public position on the issue either way. You can find the statement from the SC Sheriff's Association HERE. Knight is said to be a board member for the association and claims credit for his assistance in drafting that statement.
Knight then goes on to hoist himself on his own petard when he tries to deflect attention from his lack of testicular fortitude with the oft-repeated mantra, "Make the sentences for gun crimes stronger!" Hey Sheriff Knight, in case you haven't noticed the penalties are there. The problem lies with the various prosecutors in this state, indeed, around the country, who consistently dismiss firearm related offenses in plea deals. Maybe you should start with those folks. And grow a pair, will ya?
Sheriff Dewitt. What can we say about him. After Cannon notified the citizens how seriously he took his oath to protect and defend the Constitution, Dewitt came out with a "What he said," statement. Then he pussied up and refused to discuss the issue any more. Another sheriff who lacks the gonadinal gumption to step up and emphatically state he would do the right thing and honor his oath. Way to waffle, Wayne!
We have tracked gun control efforts for years and we found, as a general rule, the higher up you go in a law enforcement agency the
more likely you are to find police administrators who support disarming
you. Even police unions and organizations have signed on to gun control
Several years ago, when yet another overt attempt to take your weapons was underway, the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), a large police union in states that allow unions, came out in favor of gun control and expressed opposition to citizens being "allowed" to carry concealed weapons and supported the "assault" weapons ban. The FOP came out with this position without consulting the rank and file members who are, by and large, officers on the front lines.
The Police Benevolent Association (PBA), a large police union in states that allow unions, actually polled their members and took the position the members overwhelmingly supported. The PBA opposed the "assault" weapons ban and advocated concealed carry by citizens.
Now, most police officers join these organizations for a couple of reasons. Extra life insurance and legal counsel in the event something goes bad on the street and the officer needs a lawyer to protect him from his department or civil suits. Lawyers, especially good ones, are expensive and most officers can't afford one without the support of these organizations. Officers who put their faith in lawyers appointed by the employing agency often discover the only allegiance the lawyer has is to the agency itself. Many officers have been hung out to dry like that. The officers tend to concentrate on the benefits of membership and don't pay much attention to the political activities of such organizations. Based on the information above, which one would you rather be a member of?
Because most of our law is based on the old English law most folks don't realize the Sheriff of any county is the ultimate law enforcement authority in his county. In South Carolina, the only person who can arrest a sheriff is a coroner. We don't understand that provision since Elmer Halfwit, the brake mechanic at the tire shop, can run for coroner and get elected with no medical or law enforcement training whatsoever. Federal law enforcement does NOT trump a sheriff. When it comes to federal law, police officers and deputies cannot enforce those statutes. Why do you think all those "people living in the shadows" (read: illegal aliens) are still running around? Because local law enforcement cannot enforce federal immigration law.
All of you voters need to realize your county sheriff may be the final barrier between you and the oppression of the federal government and unconstitutional laws. Take that into consideration and vote accordingly. Ask the tough questions when you meet your candidates. If you don't get the right answers cross that candidate off your list.
The Propaganda and Criminals tries to make a point by making a big deal out of Florida Sheriff Nick Finch who ordered a firearm charge be retracted and freed a guy from jail. Finch wasn't relieved by the governor and hit with a misconduct in office charge because of that. He was hammered because he went in and disappeared all records related to the arrest. Upholding the Constitution is one thing, destroying documents is something entirely different. But then, you wouldn't expect the pro-gun control Propaganda and Criminals to give you ALL the facts, would you? That is why you have Charleston Thug Life, folks.
Armand Derfner. Sheesh!. "Let the Supreme Court decide," he cries! Well, we tried that, don't you remember. We watched Obama's lawyers argue that Obamacare was NOT a tax one day, then turn around and argue it WAS a tax the next day. Then we watched that political machine strong-arm at least one justice into deciding it was a tax and that piece of crap legislation was legit. The Supreme Court, beginning decades ago, has turned from an impartial piece of the checks and balances system to a biased rubber stamp for the various administrations.
What if the Supreme Court decides one day that people named Armand are morons and should be retroactively aborted? We guess it will be okay, huh, Armand? You can't really be much of a Constitutional scholar or lawyer if you see any amount of wiggle room in the phrase, "Shall not be infringed". Hey, isn't your hero Obummer also a lawyer, Constitutional "scholar" and an alleged professor who "taught" the Constitution? Yeah, we thought so.
Margaret Kelly is upset with Tim Scott's position. "He believes in the Second Amendment. That's it. That's all I learned." We don't know her, but it would appear Kelly isn't exactly a major brain trust when it comes to inferences, or even very clear wording like, "shall not be infringed". She seems to have a problem with declarative statements. You can check out the goals of her organization HERE. Now that they have been featured on CTL they might actually get some hits.
Well, there you have it folks. All of the agendas of the forces aligned against Sheriff Al Cannon and against the interest of every American citizen have been exposed. The brutal truth. It is what you have come to expect from us and we will continue to provide it. You definitely won't find the truth at the Propaganda and Criminals or any of the other "news" outlets.