Ed Morrissey:
What happens when legislatures pass unworkable or just plain stupid laws? Thanks to the innovators at the White House, who love to ignore laws in their own signature legislation when they become inconvenient (like employer mandates in ObamaCare), other executive-branch enforcement agencies have begun to follow suit. The New York Times reports that law-enforcement agencies are taking the Obama administration lead on ignoring laws about which the White House probably cares a lot more:
When Sheriff John Cooke of Weld County explains in speeches why he is not enforcing the state’s new gun laws, he holds up two 30-round magazines. One, he says, he had before July 1, when the law banning the possession, sale or transfer of the large-capacity magazines went into effect. The other, he “maybe” obtained afterward.
He shuffles the magazines, which look identical, and then challenges the audience to tell the difference.
“How is a deputy or an officer supposed to know which is which?” he asks.
It’s not just Colorado where law enforcement is refusing to enforce the unenforceable, either. Governor Andrew Cuomo had to correct a badly-written and hastily-passed gun-control law, but police in New York aren’t any more interested in enforcing it than their brethren in Colorado:
In New York State, where Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo signed one of the toughest gun law packages in the nation last January, two sheriffs have said publicly they would not enforce the laws — inaction that Mr. Cuomo said would set “a dangerous and frightening precedent.” The sheriffs’ refusal is unlikely to have much effect in the state: According to the state’s Division of Criminal Justice Services, since 2010 sheriffs have filed less than 2 percent of the two most common felony gun charges. The vast majority of charges are filed by the state or local police.
Add California to the list, too:
And in California, a delegation of sheriffs met with Gov. Jerry Brown this fall to try to persuade him to veto gun bills passed by the Legislature, including measures banning semiautomatic rifles with detachable magazines and lead ammunition for hunting (Mr. Brown signed the ammunition bill but vetoed the bill outlawing the rifles).
“Our way of life means nothing to these politicians, and our interests are not being promoted in the legislative halls of Sacramento or Washington, D.C.,” said Jon E. Lopey, the sheriff of Siskiyou County, Calif., one of those who met with Governor Brown. He said enforcing gun laws was not a priority for him, and he added that residents of his rural region near the Oregon border are equally frustrated by regulations imposed by the federal Forest Service and the Environmental Protection Agency.
I expect the Obama administration and the Department of Justice to express their shock, shock at the defiance of the separation of powers inherent in these actions. And I’m sure they’d get right on them, except that the White House and the DoJ have their hands full trying to address a couple of other issues:
If Obama can ignore written law, why can’t everyone?
@drjohn: Exactly.
Sheriff Arpaio would be proud!!
So, you approve of elected officials deciding to ignore laws that you don’t personally like?
@Greg… using the actions of your president and attorney general as examples, since they are apparently above the law, then laws become pretty much meaningless. And since the Sheriffs involved are choosing to ignore “laws” that are contrary not only to the writings of the Constitution but to the spirit in which it was written, I don’t have a problem with the actions of the Sheriffs like you don’t have a problem with the ruling regime in Washington.
@Greg: #4
You should at least read your comments before you post them. Are you saying it is OK for YOU to approve of YOUR elected officials ignoring laws that you don’t personally like, but if any law enforce officer does EXACTLY the same thing as your leader, they should be prosecuted?
Is it OK with you that obama not only doesn’t enforce CURRENT FEDERAL LAW concerning illegals, but if police officials try to enforce them, obama sues them? What about changing obamacare on his own without going through the congress that enacted it? Is it OK with you that the two Black Panthers who stood in front of the Philadelphia voting building to keep white voters out were never prosecuted, even though it was recorded? Is it OK with you that obama opened up his donation web site so that any person, organization, company, or COUNTRY could donate any amount of money they wanted to, even though that is illegal? I won’t add any more.
Before you open a can and dump its contents out, you should look at the contents and see if you want them out of the can.
@Smorgasbord#6 – The Liberal hypocrisy is stunning isn’t it??
@FAITH7: #7
Most, if not all of the liberals posting here are not just private citizens. Keep track of the time and how often they post. One posts all day long, and even posted all day on Thanksgiving. I haven’t check any others yet. These guys are working full time for the democrats, or they are posting from there work.
@Greg:
If it’s good enough for Obama, it’s good enough for the rest of us.
The Feds ignore their own gun laws, too.
*In a recent 3-year period approximately 450,000 potential gun buyers illegally lied on their applications, but the feds brought only 1,594 charges against the people who lied on background checks.
*In one recent school year, over 2,800 students were found to have a gun ON CAMPUS.
But feds only filed cases in 40 of those instances.
*One-fifth of all federal gun trafficking cases were brought in just one state – New York.
*Firearms prosecutions under President GW Bush peaked at 11,015 in 2004.
Under Obama they have only hit a high of 7,774 firearms cases in 2012.
*In Chicago, murder capital of the USA the U.S. attorney’s office only prosecuted 25 federal firearms cases during all of 2011.
*Under Obama the 50 states have referred 4,732 gun permit requests that were denied following background checks for Federal prosecution. Obama’s DOJ has only bothered with 62 of them.
The article points out that identical items may be legal or illegal.
Ammo with lead looks just like ammo without lead.
Certain magazines look just like one another although one is illegal.
As far back as the ”Sten,” a gun designed to be built in one’s garage with common tools and materials, people have been smithing their guns to personalize them and improve them.
These ”crimes” are far below the dangerousness of ignoring the federal gun laws Obama ignores.
@Nanny G: #10
This is one reason I’m glad I settled in Idaho. The only gun restrictions we have are the federal ones. 50 caliber sniper rifles are legal, any size magazine is legal, and you can put any kind of round in it you want, even armor piercing. You don’t dare shoot at anybody out of anger, because for every round YOU fire, you could have several coming back at you.
Just like the founding fathers thought when they put in the right to bear arms, they were more afraid of their government taking up arms against the citizens than the citizens taking up arms against the government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves against the government. They knew what it was like being under the rule of a tyrant, and didn’t want it to happen to the USA.
The more the obama administration does, the more fearful I am of him taking up arms against the citizens. If he does, he will have a fight on his hands when he reaches Idaho.