- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you support local law enforcement being compelled to enforce federal law?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:22 pm to NYNolaguy1
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:22 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Does your state want slavery?
Maybe it does. If so, should it be legal? What if a state wants to teach Christianity in its schools and that homosexuality is evil? It's a dangerous game you play when you decide as a state which federal laws you're going to honor and which you're not.
1
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:22 pm to ClientNumber9
So a state decides to enact a policy (e.g. immigration laws) that are different than whats on the federal books.
How is that different than a state legalizing a drug thats illegal at the federal level, then refusing to arrest them?
How is that different than a state legalizing a drug thats illegal at the federal level, then refusing to arrest them?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:23 pm to NYNolaguy1
I'm a fed in Washington state and I arrest residents for MJ possession all the time, despite its legality here.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:25 pm to NYNolaguy1
Oh, and your analogy breaks down when you consider that immigration laws are specifically mentioned as a federal responsibility in the constitution while drug laws are not, and there are overlapping federal/state charges.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:25 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Maybe it does. If so, should it be legal? What if a state wants to teach Christianity in its schools and that homosexuality is evil?
Call me crazy, but I think a states population should be able to decide whatever policies it wishes. Do you really think democracy is so dangerous? If a state wants to enact whatever policy, let them.
quote:
It's a dangerous game you play when you decide as a state which federal laws you're going to honor and which you're not.
The state govt's job is to enforce state law.
The federal govts job is to enforce federal law.
Do you disagree?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:27 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
I'm a fed in Washington state and I arrest residents for MJ possession all the time, despite its legality here.
Right, and I have no problem with that.
I disagree with the policy overall, but would you expect state law enforcement to bring you citizens that are following state law?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:29 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
The right of people to be charged with a crime before having their assets stolen by a government.
I am guessing you dont know about asset forfeiture?
Or the right of states to choose their own drinking age?
This is a bigger issue than just immigration.
but we are talking about immigration which false squarely into national interest
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:30 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
Oh, and your analogy breaks down when you consider that immigration laws are specifically mentioned as a federal responsibility in the constitution
Go back a page, I quoted it.
That simply means its not a state issue. If its not a state issue, why dedicate a state's manpower and money to it?
quote:
there are overlapping federal/state charges.
Like you said it depends on the state.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:36 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Call me crazy, but I think a states population should be able to decide whatever policies it wishes. Do you really think democracy is so dangerous? If a state wants to enact whatever policy, let them.
Sure, fine. But something tells me you'll be the first to file a lawsuit when a baker refuses to bake a cake for a homosexual couple or when the school board meeting begins its proceedings with a prayer to Jesus.
I'll go down this road but know without federal supremacy, slavery would still be legal in the south. Long as you're ok with this.
quote:
The federal govts job is to enforce federal law.
Do you disagree?
See my above posts. Of course I agree. But when a state cop can't call a fed to tell him he's got a six time murdering illegal alien in custody, or you try to bar immigration agents from entering state courtrooms that's not acceptable. That's a far cry from asking state authorities to enforce federal law.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:38 pm to NYNolaguy1
(no message)
This post was edited on 2/15/18 at 11:30 pm
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:39 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I disagree with the policy overall, but would you expect state law enforcement to bring you citizens that are following state law?
As I've said 4 times in this thread, I don't expect Washington to present me MJ users. But also don't expect them to actively thwart me at every possible angle while trying to locate a smuggler or trafficker.
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:41 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:Hmmm...should I support them to break it?...
Do you support local law enforcement being compelled to enforce federal law?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:49 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
But something tells me you'll be the first to file a lawsuit when a baker refuses to bake a cake for a homosexual couple or when the school board meeting begins its proceedings with a prayer to Jesus.
Nah, the baker thing was retarded and the school board thing equally so. All I would expect is that christian centric communities pray t Jesus, Jewish to Judaisim, etc. I think thats reasonable.
quote:
I'll go down this road but know without federal supremacy, slavery would still be legal in the south. Long as you're ok with this.
I disagree. Modernization would have eliminated slaves before the start of the 20th century, like the rest of the modern world.
Changing policy by force is the polar opposite of changing it by consensus, and should be frowned on in a democracy. You still see some of that resentment today in the taking down of the statues (which I also opposed- I am the descendant of many confederate soldiers).
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:56 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:Isn't the real question should local law enforcement be held accountable for willful violation of federal law?
Do you support local law enforcement being compelled to enforce federal law?
Posted on 1/25/18 at 11:59 pm to bigblake
quote:
To demonstrate the absurdity of your claim, I'll make an equally absurd claim using similar logic. Could California legally allow for an enemy army (say Japan) to enter California unopposed?
California could in theory do whatever it wishes, but as I recall, national defense is a responsibility of the national govt (as is immigration). As such the federal govt (and federal law enforcement) would be fully within its rights to enforce federal law on those who break it.
Also, the actors who would help an enemy army are still subject to federal law. Theres nothing a state could do to protect them from say a treason charge.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 12:52 am to NYNolaguy1
quote:
hould individual states have the right to set their own MJ legalization laws?
thats called making a law.
which is another whole other thing
where are we going with this?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 2:13 am to NYNolaguy1
States aren't getting any federal money for highways if they make their drinking age under 21.
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:40 am to NYNolaguy1
Cooperating with federal law enforcement is not enforcing federal law.
Refusing to cooperate with federal law and allowing criminals to escape justice from the feds is obstruction of justice. There's just no way around it.
Sanctuary cities are a disgrace. Why in the hell would any city openly proclaim that it will harbor fugitives from the law? What good could possibly come of that?
Refusing to cooperate with federal law and allowing criminals to escape justice from the feds is obstruction of justice. There's just no way around it.
Sanctuary cities are a disgrace. Why in the hell would any city openly proclaim that it will harbor fugitives from the law? What good could possibly come of that?
Posted on 1/26/18 at 7:41 am to NYNolaguy1
yes
only because it allows people to feel the effects of our federal police state in more real terms
only because it allows people to feel the effects of our federal police state in more real terms
Posted on 1/26/18 at 8:06 am to NYNolaguy1
So long as the local PD is reimbursed in a timely manner for enforcing federal laws, I do not see a problem. However, once you arrest someone, you become 100% responsible for them. That means 3 meals a day, shelter, and medical care. All that can significantly stress the finances of a small town PD.
Page 2 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News