All police who are against the increasing powers of federal government and loss of individuals rights in these times, should go to
this guy's site and read his book and spread the word.
To fight for your rights you've got to get together and start getting educated and know what power you have.
The Office of Sheriff traces its origins to tenth century England and is firmly rooted in the common law. It is the oldest law enforcement office known within the common law system and is accorded dignity and high trust. The American Colonies adopted the Office of Sheriff and the position evolved into that of, ”Chief Law Enforcement Officer,” in nearly all states. Today, the Office of Sheriff protects the citizenry in 3084 American counties.
As the chief and only elected law enforcement officer, the Office of Sheriff is unique in that the Sheriff is accountable “directly to the people.” This allows the Sheriff the freedom to speak out on matters affecting criminal justice and public safety.
The Office of Sheriff has existed in Washington since the formation of the Washington Territory in 1853. The Office of Sheriff is established by Article XI, Section 5 of the Washington State Constitution. The major duties of the Office of Sheriff are prescribed in Section 38.28.010 of the Revised Code of Washington and include the following:
The sheriff is the chief executive officer and conservator of the peace of the county. In the execution of his office, he and his deputies:
(1) Shall arrest and commit to prison all persons who break the peace, or attempt to break it, and all persons guilty of public offenses;
(2) Shall defend the county against those who, by riot or otherwise, endanger the public peace or safety;
(3) Shall execute the process and orders of the courts of justice or judicial officers, when delivered for that purpose, according to law;
(4) Shall execute all warrants delivered for that purpose by other public officers, according to the provisions of particular statutes;
(5) Shall attend the sessions of the courts of record held within the county, and obey their lawful orders or directions;
(6) Shall keep and preserve the peace in their respective counties, and quiet and suppress all affrays, riots, unlawful assemblies and insurrections, for which purpose, and for the service of process in civil or criminal cases, and in apprehending or securing any person for felony or breach of the peace, they may call to their aid such persons, or power of their county as they may deem necessary.
http://www.co.whatcom.wa.us/sheriff/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The following history of the office of sheriff is provided by the National Sheriff's Association publications.
Western Sheriff Gear The office of sheriff is the oldest political office in the western world. It has existed in one form or another since the reign of King Alfred the Great (871-901 A.D.). The office of sheriff evolved from a rudimentary method for providing local control and services under the monarchy to an arm of democratic government fully invested in the constitutional pursuit of justice. Significantly, it has remained a fundamentally local institution.
The roots of the office of sheriff may be found in Anglo-Saxon England. Families came together in groups of ten families. They were called tithing. The leader of these groups were called tithing men, who were elected by each tithing. He had the responsibility of raising the Hue and Cry (a process in which every able-bodied man had to participate in the chase and apprehension of offenders; this was the origin of today's citizen's arrest).
http://www.delawarecountysheriff.org/history.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
During the great westward expansion of the United States, the sheriff was installed in every territory and state. The sheriff followed near on the heels of the pioneers who settled the areas. Violence was a common problem on the frontier, and the idea that there had to be a "taming" of the west was what had the sheriffs moving west just behind the first pioneers.
These new migrating sheriffs retained their common law duties. One common law power that became particularly important in the sparsely populated and expansive western lands was that of Posse Comitatus, "the power of the county." This put all of the able-bodied men in the county at the disposal of the sheriff, a clear benefit at a time when the sheriff had few deputies at his disposal.
http://www.delawarecountysheriff.org/history.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
In the mid-1990s, the transformation of the sheriff and his duties was greatly expanded. What began as a horseback sheriff housing prisoners in his home evolved into a full-service sheriff's office, which provides law enforcement, patrol duties, security to the courts, service of civil process, and operation of the county jail.
The office of sheriff is potentially the most powerful in the entire criminal justice system. And its influence extends far beyond that system. There are at least five reasons for this:
First, the sheriff is the chief law enforcement officer in his county. This status derives from the Common Law and applies whether the office in question is established by constitution or statute. It is also typical for sheriffs to be constitutionally or legislatively authorized to assume the functions of municipal law enforcement within their counties under circumstances of a breakdown of public order, wide-scale corruption, or collapse of the local enforcement mechanism.
Second, the sheriff is elected at-large on a county-wide basis. This, of course, means that the sheriff is directly accountable to the entire electorate for his performance. The sheriff typically garners a significant portion of the votes cast; this is a great source of power and an awesome responsibility.
Third, the county sheriff is the only agency head with specific constitutional or statutory responsibilities for performing functions in all three of the subsystems of the criminal justice system: law enforcement, courts, and corrections. This tripartite authority provides the sheriff with legitimate -- in fact, mandatory -- roles to play in the full range of policy-making across the subsystem.
Fourth, the sheriff performs at least five significant leadership roles that influence the health and well-being of his community. He is a political leader. He is a criminal justice leader. He is a community leader. He is a leader of his organization and a technical leader. This makes him a resource to other key policy makers as well as to the general public in his community.
Fifth, the sheriff is part of an institution that transcends the local community. He has peers in 46 states in the Union. He is part of a state coalition of his peers that wields significant influence in the development of policy and law. He and his state colleagues are part of a national coalition that performs the same role in Washington, D.C. As elected officials themselves, the sheriffs represent a powerful -- and short -- link between state and federal lawmakers and their constituents "back home." When sheriffs speak, legislators listen.
http://www.delawarecountysheriff.org/history.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If there is going to be a "ron paul revolution" to get back basic rights to counter the further taking away of them by the TPTB you're going to need help at local level. As more power is centralised and goes into fewer hands, you'll see bush/obama/nwo puppets trying to use emergencys to trick people into going to prison for stupid stuff so they can feed the prison industrial complex and get rich. When they use military weapons against civilians that is saying the people are the enemy and a sign of their intent to use brute force and to scare the public into giving up control of the old order.
THE SHERIFF
MORE POWER THAN THE PRESIDENT
By: Alan Stang
For many years, the people’s attention in the Battle for America has been directed toward the federal government and its offices. Candidates stand for the House and the Senate. Patriotic groups publish voting records of incumbents. Considerable time, effort and money are expended in support of candidates for President. After decades of such commendable activity, the record shows it is an utter failure. The danger to the nation is worse than it ever was.
For many of those years, Republicrud bosses whined that if the people would only give them control of the federal government, they would undo Democrud damage and restore Free Enterprise. Finally, the people gave it to them. Remember? The Republicruds controlled the House, the Senate and the Oval Office long enough to turn the country around. What happened? The Republicruds made our problems much worse. Their spending made the profligate drunken sailor look like Scrooge. They deserved it when the people kicked them out. They lost all credibility.
Yes, there is Dr. Ron Paul. But Dr. No is a political aberration. Time and again, he stands alone. He has neither men’s room problems nor woman problems. He doesn’t take congressional retirement. He actually returns "money" (computer entries) to the federal treasury. He proposes abolishing the Fed and the income tax and replacing them with nothing. In foreign affairs he suggests that we mind our own business. Imagine! But, again, he is an aberration.
Why? Certainly one reason has to be that we ship the successful congressional candidate off to the District of Corruption. However good the new congressman may have been when he or she boarded the plane to the District; he is subjected to intoxicating blandishments when he arrives in the enemy camp.
Soon, he succumbs to the blandishments, maybe even making himself blackmailable, and begins to vote as the party boss says, without even reading the bills. Instead of representing the people of his congressional district in the District of Criminals, he represents the D.C. to the C.D. He or she now is one of the boys or the girls. It has happened hundreds of times.
So, if the long, heroic effort to elect federal legislators has failed, does there remain any governmental Horatius who can stand in the gap; who can lead the Battle for America and restore the Constitution? There is. Lock and load, mount up and prepare for the return of the sheriff.
My guess is that in the minds of many Americans the sheriff is an antiquated figure who lives in the movies. In the older movies he is the hero; he is Gary Cooper in "High Noon," awaiting the train that will bring killer Frank Miller back to town. In the new ones, he is the southern sheriff, even bigger than Rosie O’Donnell, sneering, sadistic, racist, violent, etc. He has no modern relevance.
But now here comes Sheriff Richard Mack, elected and re-elected in Graham County, Arizona, where he served for eight years. During his tenure, three federal agents came to a meeting of Arizona sheriffs and told them in certain terms how they would be dragooned as unpaid federal bureaucrats and administer the new, federal Brady gun registration law.
The law was named of course for Ronald Reagan’s press secretary, who was severely wounded in the immensely suspicious attempt to assassinate the President. Since then, Mrs. Brady has become a leader of the campaign for Nazi gun confiscation. I don’t know whether she was as crazy before the shootings as she is now. Just one more increment of lunacy and they would have to lock her up.
Richard Mack and the other Arizona sheriffs at the meeting rebelled. Sheriff Richard says the language he heard – in which he did not participate – could not be repeated in the presence of genteel Christian ladies, so we can’t tell you here what the sheriffs said. But Sheriff Mack did take the government to court. He sued the United States, and Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana joined him as plaintiff.
On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S. Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length. The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:
". . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by the other’" – "a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are governed by it." (P. 920)
Scalia quotes President James Madison, "father" of the Constitution: "[T]he local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere." The Federalist, No. 39 at 245.
Again and again, Justice Scalia pounds the point home (page 921): "This separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections of liberty: ‘Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either front.’. . ." Gregory, 501 U.S. at 458.
He quotes President Madison again: "In the compound republic of America, the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that each will be controlled by itself." (P. 922)
No one could make this any clearer. The primary purpose of the Fathers was to prevent someone from grabbing all the power. When that happens, they knew, the result is arbitrary, confiscatory, government, the kind Tom Jefferson described in the Declaration of Independence. We would call it totalitarian.
Madison explains: "The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny." Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788.
To prevent that from happening, they divided the power. First, they divided the federal power into three parts: the executive, the legislative and the judicial. They would bicker among themselves, so that no one of them could seize all the power the Constitution grants to the federal government.
The Founders divided the power even more. They set the limited power the Constitution grants the "general authority," Madison’s term for the federal government, against the vast residual powers of the states. Each sphere of government, state and federal, would be supreme in its own sphere. Neither could control the other. Each protects itself from intervention by the other. Each has its own laws and rules.
Madison says this: "Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of." Loc. Cit.
What does all this mean today in the Battle for America? Sheriff Mack says it proves that the sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county. Within that jurisdiction – inside his county – the sheriff has more power than the governor of his state. Indeed, the sheriff has more power in his county than the President of the United States. In his county, he can overrule the President and kick his people out. Remember, the President has few and limited powers.
What? The sheriff can do that? He’s not just a character in a movie? That’s right. Not only can the sheriff do that; sheriffs have already done that, more than once. Most Americans are not aware of that because lying, conspiracy scumbags like Rush Humbug, Shallow Sean Hannitwerp and Hugh Blewitt (a lawyer) etc., haven’t told them.
Remember, the office of sheriff has a pedigree so long, we are not positive about when it was created. We think it was in the Ninth Century in England. We do know that each land district, or "shire," was governed by a "reeve." The sheriff of Nottingham became famous. At first, the king appointed them. With few exceptions, our American shire reeves are elected by the people.
In 1997, in Nye County, Nevada, federal agents arrived to seize cattle that belonged to rancher Wayne Hage. The sheriff gave them a choice: skedaddle or be arrested. They skedaddled. The cows stayed where they were. Wyoming sheriffs have told federal agencies they must check with the respective sheriff before they serve any papers, make any arrests or confiscate any property.
In Idaho, a 74-year-old rancher shot an endangered gray wolf which had killed one of his calves. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent three armed agents to serve a warrant. Lemhi County Sheriff Brett Barslou said that was "inappropriate, heavy-handed and dangerously close to excessive force." More than 500 people turned out for a rally in the small towns of Challis and Salmon to support the sheriff and the rancher and to tell the federal government to back off.
While Richard Mack was sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, a bridge washed out. Parents had to drive twenty six miles to get their kids to school half a mile across the river. But the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wouldn’t fix it. First they had to do an "environmental impact study," to replace a bridge already there. They were in no hurry. The study would take a mere ten years.
The people’s suffering reached the board of supervisors. The board voted to dredge the river and fix the bridge. The feds warned that they would be fined $50,000 per day if they tried. The supervisors hesitated. Sheriff Mack promised them and the workers protection and pledged to call out a posse for the purpose if necessary. They built the bridge and the Corps of Engineers faded. The board never paid a dime.
So the long dormant spirit of America is reviving. The states are beginning to adopt Tenth Amendment resolutions, using powers they have always had. The people are restoring our long unbalanced constitutional system. There is something "blowin’ in the wind," but it isn’t what Bob Dylan thought it was. Recently, Sheriff Mack addressed 570 people in Fredericksburg, Texas. He reports that the reception was "beyond fantastic."
What can you do? For once we are not just complaining. There is a plan. I do not argue that you should forget about Congress. Not at all; if you see an opportunity there, take it. Always remember that right now it is run by people like Barney the Bugger of Taxachusetts, who will be elected by moronth in hith dithtrict until he dieth of AIDS.
Most of the time, when you approach your congressman, you come to complain. In the new crusade, you will approach your sheriff and tell him that he is not only handsome, charming and overwhelmingly masculine, but also that he has powers he may not be aware of. You have come to tell him what they are and to back him up. My guess is, when you tell him that, he will not kick you out.
Tell him you expect him to return the courtesy when the Nazis come from the District of Criminals to get the guns. Tell him you are ready in a minute to serve under his direction in a posse. He will not move to Washington and be corrupted. He will stay there with you. Show him the ten orders the Oath Keepers will not obey. The Oath Keepers are retired and active duty military and police. Their web site is oath-keepers.blogspot.com. The first order they promise to disobey is an order to disarm you.
Put him together with Sheriff Mack. You will find him at sheriffmack.com. His telephone numbers are 928 792-4340 and 928 792-3888. Bring the sheriff to your town to speak. He will explain all this. Invite your own sheriff. At the meeting I attended, the local sheriff and chief of police were there and loved what they heard. No one dislikes hearing how important he is.
What if your sheriff is stupid or a federal factotum? That is what you will find in many big cities. I once interviewed Los Angeles County Sheriff Peter Pitchess, who said no one should have a hand gun. I asked him how a five foot lady alone in bed could defend herself from a rapist. Realizing he was perilously close to making himself look even dumber than he did usually, Pitchess conceded she could have a long gun.
I brightened. A street sweeper isn’t really the best weapon for close quarters, but it would give the lady a chance. Unfortunately, Pitchess added the word, "unloaded." I asked him what that five foot lady with an unloaded shotgun could do against a six foot rapist. A police captain sat beside Pitchess during the interview. His job was to extricate Peter from the jams he persisted on getting himself into. The police captain extruded a barrage of miasma. It was effective. I did not get an answer.
In such cases, says Sheriff Mack, move to a county where the sheriff is receptive. Many more will be. For instance, in Texas there are 254 counties. Each has a sheriff. If it is feasible to do so, run for sheriff yourself. Even your wife will be impressed when she sees you with a hog leg on your hip and a star on your vest. Imagine the intense joy of meeting IRS Communists or BATFE Nazis at the county line and denying them admission.
The Battle for America will be decided in your county at your front door. If you act now, later you will not need to "fill your hand."
"Published originally at EtherZone.com : republication allowed with this notice and hyperlink intact."
http://www.etherzone.com/2009/stang032009.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Once people understand how to avoid putting too much power into a single place, they can block all the bad that big government and big brother wants to bring in to make people's lives more miserable to leverage them for things. Don't let the giant step all over you or they'll be more encouraged to keep doing it. They'll try to group you as being some anti-government anarchist out to cause chaos in order to make you sound like criminal trying to harm society, but that means they are scared. They need complete control in order to put everyone into prisons, that is the goal. But will only achieve it if people allow themselves to get distracted by entertainment, willingly allow it to happen by whining how it's too hard, and hopefully for the controllers: forget about things easily with their ADHD attention spans and lack of education so they won't want to think for themselves and be reliant on the control freak for everything.
The reason it works is because we allow them to convince us they are right out of tiredness to have to keep debating so we say: "enough already just let them take control of our lives."
just using them as one example of "technology being used evily" which I'm sure there is many other examples of it being used for good. So no accusations of me being a luddite who hates progress. Looks like wikipedia can take their 
