First Signs of Civil War begin in the US: Sheriff Tony DeMeo Threatens Force Against Federal Agents

This is not the 1st time nore will it be the last. In this part of the country (west) there have been numerous occassions when Sheriff's have stood up to Federal Officers, and at times done so with drawn revolvers or weapons. Salmon, Idaho, well over 15 years ago, the sheriff ejected Federal Law Enforcement who were harqassing a raancher about a wolf he had killed thaat he had caught feeding on one of his calves. the Federal officers were escroted out of the county and told not to come back until they were willing to check with the sheriff first, on pain of arrest. In addition to Idaho, it's happened in Wyoming, Montanaa, Nevada...and apparently continues.

The sheriff is elected by the people to enforce law in his jurisdiction. he is the leading LEO in his county, and any federal official coming into the county (unless there is an indictment and/or investigation against the sheriff himself) must get with the sheriff before attemoting to do just about anything with respect to law enforcement in the Sheriff's jurisdiction.

I know...that’s what you taught me during the Klamath Falls incident!

It explains why Sheriff Arpaio is no one’s patsy, and continues to do his job according to the law.

Sheriffs with moxie...and an understanding of their duties and powers...ROCK!

So do you...;o)

These disputes in the West Predate Obama by decades. But it was during Clinton's time we saw a sort of ramping up by the feds, with more Interior Dept. and USDA employees being issued "enforcement" authority and the guns to go with it.

It is probably right for them to have law enforcement power when an issue involves legitimate federal interest (the "needful buildings" mentioned in the Constitution), but you'll have a hard time finding anything about wild land protection and such in the Constitution. It is too bad the Western states allowed the federal government ownership and control over so much of their land to begin with. I suppose the original intent was attractive, because it was for the purpose of encouraging and promoting economic growth in those states by creating agencies to facilitate the use of the West's natural resources - but what it has become today has the opposite effect.

Most of what it seems they do today is illegitimate. The Western states' governments have matured and it is high time they move to take control of their own affairs and that would include the public land, whether used for mining, timber, grazing, parks, or nothing at all. I believe that was the original federal intent. Probably the only state that benefits from federal land management today is Alaska, and I'm not even sure about that.

I still remember the chills that went up and down my spine when all the tv screens in the store were bright with fire and flames during the holocaust event at Waco, Texas. The entire store lit up like it was on fire.

All were killed, most of them being innocent victims (children) of heavy handed and misguided Federal government intervention IMO. No survivor had the resources to challenge the government's badly managed initiative. We have no Statesmen in our congress. Thus it stands.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.