‘Enforce or Resign’ Says New Mexico Governor to Sheriffs Regarding New Red Flag Law

New Mexico this week became the 18th state to enact a red flag law.

Also known as extreme risk protection orders (ERPO), red flag laws allow law enforcement to confiscate firearms from an individual accused of being a threat to himself or others.  

New Mexico Gov. Lujan Grisham praised the passage of Senate Bill 5 in a press release. 

“New Mexico has balanced individual rights and public safety in a responsible way that will reduce our unacceptable suicide rate and other forms of gun violence,”  Grisham said. 

“The Legislature had the strength to pass this measure because we all recognize: Enough is enough. And we have the power to change the dynamic of gun violence in our communities. Today we are standing up – we do not accept the status quo; we do not accept the risk posed by dangerous armed individuals who have articulated their desire to cause harm,” she continued.

SEE ALSO: A Single Florida County Seized 412 Guns Last Year Under the State’s Red Flag Law

An earlier version of the bill would have allowed anyone to petition for an ERPO.  But during negotiations lawmakers decided to limit that power to police.  

After guns are seized from the accused, a hearing must be held within 10 days to determine whether the ERPO should be extended for a year.  It’s not clear what type of mental health treatment, if any, is offered to the individual.  Or whether other deadly implements are also taken in the initial raid: kitchen knives, baseball bats, automobiles, etc.  After all, a crazed man in a rental truck can be as deadly as a crazed man with a gun.

In other words, the focus is on simply confiscating firearms — not on addressing the true source of the potential danger, the individual.

The New Mexico Sheriffs’ Association voiced its displeasure with the new law.  Arguing in a public letter last week that confiscation before due process raises constitutional concerns.  

The 18 states with red flag laws. (Photo: Wikipedia)

“Citizens have a right to bear arms and we cannot circumvent that right when they have not even committed a crime or even been accused of committing one,” wrote Tony Mace, the chairman of the association. “‘Shall not be infringed’ is a very clear and concise component of an Amendment that our forefathers felt was important enough to be recognized immediately following freedom of speech and religion.”

While signing the legislation Tuesday, Gov. Grisham was very candid to sheriffs who are contemplating not enforcing ERPOs, including Sheriff Mace.

“They cannot not enforce,” she said. “And if they really intend to do that, they should resign as a law enforcement officer and leader in that community.”

Sheriff Mace told local media that the association has retained an attorney and is going to pursue the matter further via legal channels.

***Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE!***

About the author: S.H. Blannelberry is the News Editor of GunsAmerica.

{ 84 comments… add one }
  • DavidInCO February 5, 2021, 10:11 am

    If they are really interested in preventing suicide, are they confiscating everything in the medicine cabinet? How about rope? Belts? Bed sheets? Water. Water is a serious drowning hazard. Should just shut that off. Hell, better turn off the electricity too. Might stick their finger in a socket….

  • UP YOURS November 20, 2020, 8:09 am

    I agree with FLHawkl

    If a government agent tries to seize your firearm, which is your personal property, under some bogus red-flag law or because the state or feds made owning it illegal, it would be a violation of not only the Constitutional Amendments that he quoted but also Article VI of the Constitution.

    The firearm owner would have the right and perhaps even a moral duty to resist the agent – not to be called law enforcement anymore – by force and if necessary, by deadly force (see “When All Else Fails – The Ethics of Resistance to State Injustice,” by Jason Brennan. The outcome for the victim could be very poor but if enough people resist in this way then the enforcers would hopefully back off and the rule of law would be restored, if not on paper then by the action of The People. If not then the only recourse would be for the free states to secede and woe to those who would try to stop it.

    So when the tyrants come for you just spray them with some element 82. And to the scumbag government agent who gave me a hard time for saying this several years ago, SCREW YOU! Gotta love the 1st Amendment.

  • Sonofmalarky August 21, 2020, 11:30 am

    Behind those vacant eyes is a vast wasteland of socialism. Along with ignoring the constitution she has destroyed an already fragile economy. I have no doubt she will be a one term governor, if she even finishes her first term.

  • SpiritOfLiberty March 15, 2020, 2:46 pm

    A Sheriff is an elected official. They answer directly to the people, NOT to the Governor. They are on equal footing with the Governor. How can a Governor deign to ORDER around a Sheriff?

    • Eric von Siebenburg December 28, 2020, 6:34 am

      How ignorant can you be? A Sheriff is on an equal footing with a Governor.” ? Go to school, O nameless one. Not only isn’t a Sheriff “equal to a Governor” A Sheriff does NOT get to enforce only the laws he personally agrees with – He CAN be removed from office under § 128-16 (A North Carolina statute) for “Refusal to perform the duties of his office.” State law determines a Sheriff’s duties. ANY superior court judge can remove any Sheriff. That would be effectuated by the State police if necessary.

      Officers subject to removal; for what offenses.

      Any sheriff or police officer shall be removed from office by the judge of the superior court,
      resident in or holding the courts of the district where said officer is resident upon charges made in
      writing, and hearing thereunder, for the following causes:
      (1) For willful or habitual neglect or refusal to perform the duties of his office.
      (2) For willful misconduct or maladministration in office.
      (3) For corruption.
      (4) For extortion.
      (5) Upon conviction of a felony.
      (6) For intoxication, or upon conviction of being intoxicated. (P.L. 1913, c. 761, s.
      20; 1919, c. 288; C.S., s. 3208; 1959, c. 1286; 1961, c. 991; 1973, c. 108, s. 82.)

      • Carroll Hale III February 5, 2021, 7:24 am

        Just thought I’d point out that the state at issue here isn’t North Carolina, it’s New Mexico, so your bringing up NC statutes isn’t germane to the argument…

        I haven’t had the opportunity to look up NM laws, so I can’t speak to whether NM has a similar law.

      • mtman2 June 25, 2021, 4:35 am

        Yeah well a Sheriff can arrest a governor within their own juristiction or anyone one else for that matter…!

  • Josh 'Acecool' Moser March 4, 2020, 6:34 pm

    If they are taken for an evaluation, they aren’t in the home and the firearms wouldn’t be accessible. If they are truly a threat, there are laws in place to ensure a person whom is a danger to themself or others can be committed for a mandatory, or voluntary, hold for a different chosen amount of time per state.

    So, if they are not in the home – why remove the guns the family may need?

    If people took mental health seriously, instead of shrugging it off and ignoring it, and actually helped people that are being bullied for years to the point of ‘needing to do something’; then we would have far fewer issues. But when a child is bullied for years, and the teachers don’t believe that child because the bully is ‘too charming’ to the adults, then the child will feel they have no other choice other than to put a stop to it for themself.

    There was a case where a teacher even called the cops and had a child, who was only getting proof of the felony bullying taking place, charged with felony wiretapping for recording the crime being committed. This type of behavior from teachers is unacceptable. I don’t know the result of that story, but it should’ve never happened. Teachers didn’t believe the victim of the crime because the criminal was too charming, or some reason or another. So the child acted, without knowing about the states 2 / all party consent law. Be glad the child in this instance chose to defend himself with a camera.

    If it isn’t clear; I don’t condone the actions taken against the students in various school shootings, I merely understand why a lot of them have happened and the majority of them are preventable.

    But, to actually do something productive would be bad for politics, right?

  • Roger March 1, 2020, 5:28 am

    Thank you for pointing out that the law won’t take away knives, hammers, rental trucks, etc. Only guns. This is disingenuous. Also, all the focus is on “gun violence.” Are we to take it that other violence is generally ok? Hysteria and ignorance make a bad combination

  • Ares338 February 29, 2020, 8:58 am

    State officials who punish law enforcement for obeying the Constitution need to resign.

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 6:49 am

      Another classically stupid statement: “State officials who punish law enforcement for obeying the Constitution need to resign.” State law enforcement officers have a responsibility directly to the laws of the STATE wherein they serve. They are not Federal officers and their STATE defines their legal status, authority and responsibilities. In the order of official accountability, the first obligation of ANY law enforcement officer in ANY state is to that state. Violation of state law by a sheriff, or a failure to perform duties PRESCRIBED BY the state are enforced by the state’s Attorney General who would petition a superior court judge in that same state to order removal of that Sheriff. State police would then be authorized by the Governor or Superintendent of State Police to effectuate that removal if it were contested, belayed or obstructed by any means. Any such resistance or obstruction would generate additional criminal charges.

      • DavidInCO February 5, 2021, 10:17 am

        New Mexico Sheriff’s Oath of Office: “Every person elected or appointed to any office shall, before entering upon his duties take and subscribe to an oath or affirmation that he will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution and laws of this state, and that he will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of his office to the best of his ability.”

        Stated in order of precedent.

      • Larry April 30, 2021, 6:26 pm

        Eric, the Constitution IS the Supreme Law of the Land. No state law or law maker (including Governors) can supersede or subvert the constitution to their desires even if they call it a law. Red Flag laws DO violate the Constitution’s 2nd Amendment and as such are illegal acts and should never be obeyed or enforced.
        Are you really this ignorant of America’s Documents of Freedom or do you just hate guns / gun owners?

  • Andrew N. February 29, 2020, 12:20 am

    The local Sheriffs are elected, not appointed by the Governor. They also take an oath to “Support and Defend the Constitution of the United States”, which supersedes the Governor’s authority. Get over yourself, lady.

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 6:57 am

      Andrew, you know nothing. A County Sheriff’s oath of office is to the constitution of the State (or Commonwealth) which conveys the totality of a Sheriff’s legal obligations and defines his duties, responsibilities and geographical parameters of his jurisdiction, which is solely determined by the state. NOTHING in the official duties of ANY Sheriff “supersedes” ANY Governor’s authority in ANY state in the U.S. A County sheriff can be removed by a superior court STATE judge on petition by the STATE Attorney General unilaterally or at the request of the GOVERNOR. (You are really too old to still cling to these youthful fantasies of yours.)

  • Robert February 28, 2020, 11:02 pm

    And the “Red Flag ” laws violate and abuse the very truth, rights, protection and belief of the 2nd Amendment. Which reads exactly as stated here….”A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”. You take away our guns, you follow in the exact steps as Lennon, Hitler and Stalin while setting up Americans to be victims for criminals, a police state and slavery.

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:03 am

      Read the newspapers, Robert, we are already taking away your guns under the Red Flag laws of numerous states – no one is listening to your pathetic whining, your jailhouse lawyer act, or your two-bit philosophy. You sound like one of those “sovereign citizen” imbeciles talking about his “Constitutional rights” as the cops smash his car window and drag him from the car to the ground. Or Sheriff Giuseppe Arpaio as he was arrested by the FBI on the order of a judge.

      • mtman2 June 25, 2021, 4:41 am

        lol…and your the same moronic ignoramous that trusts in the unConstitutional FBI as being “on the level” esp believed O’Bomba was a great potus…”whatta a maroon”…lol…!

  • Leighton Cavendish February 28, 2020, 7:04 pm

    Meh…just call them undocumented projectile launchers…

  • Michael J February 28, 2020, 7:01 pm

    Follow the Constitution or resign.

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:04 am

      Go to school or shut up

  • Veracocha Starr February 28, 2020, 5:59 pm

    Please regard the following case laws: “Any. law, regulation, rule or statute that is repugnant to the Constitution of America is Null and Void from its’ inception”.
    Marbury vs Madison

    “When Constitutional issues are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”
    Miranda vs Arizona

    Let this be some guidance regarding “Red Flag” laws.

  • Matt Larson February 28, 2020, 5:28 pm

    By that rationale, she should have resigned the day after she took office and declared sanctuary city status, and pulling the National Guard off the border, in direct defiance of Federal law.

  • kenneth barber February 28, 2020, 4:31 pm

    the governor is the one who needs to resign along with the legislators who voted for the unconstitutional law.

  • Scott February 28, 2020, 3:41 pm

    “They cannot not enforce.”

    Bvllsh1t! They swore an oath to defend the constitution of the United States from ALL enemies, foreign or domestic.

    What they “cannot” do is to enforce a law that is unconstitutional!

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:10 am

      You are dead wrong, Scott. their oath is to the STATE – they are NOT federal officers and they do NOT take a national oath. Only the supreme Court can determine the constitutionality of a state law. Until the high court makes such a determination (they haven’t and they won’t) not a legal scholar of YOUR noble standing. What is is, fantasy and ignorance on parade? Go to school, read a newspaper…okay then – LEARN to read…read the state laws where you live…or just shut up.

      • mtman2 June 25, 2021, 4:47 am

        Hey RETARD how’s about you shut up you arrogant ignorance here.

        ´ In the United States the Oath of Office requirement of a sheriff is “that he will support the constitution of the United States and the constitution and laws of the state wherein he is elected, and will faithfully discharge all of the duties of the Office of Sheriff to the best of his ability, concluding by calling …Dec 31, 2018

  • Jay February 28, 2020, 3:17 pm

    There must be a provision in these laws where a retaliatory false accusation by someone triggering a red flag removal of firearms proven false or malicious turns into a prosecution of the accuser.
    If I can level accusations against you and have your 2nd amendment rights taken away even if only for 10 days and there is no repercussions against the accuser then it is truly unjust. The worst part of all of this is it is nearly impossible to prove a negative, it is truly a case of guilty until proven innocent.

    • John Boutwell February 28, 2020, 7:42 pm

      Well stated Jay.

    • Fal Phil February 28, 2020, 8:49 pm

      Someone needs to sue the state attorney generals for violation of due process. All it takes is one successful suit.

    • SD February 29, 2020, 8:26 am

      Very well said Jay, I totally agree

  • Richard Holmes February 28, 2020, 2:30 pm

    Sadly, New Mexicans elected this pantsuit wearing Hillary wannabe as she had way more money than her Republican counterpart……money from outside New Mexico from a##holes like Soros and Bloomberg. The former governor, a female Hispanic Republican had a great 8 years. The sheriff’s should certainly band together and request her resignation and continue to resist this nonsense.

  • Stan d. Upnow February 28, 2020, 12:27 pm

    Following closely on the heels of these un-Constitutional “Red Flag” laws will be new ones mandating the affected citizen be remanded to a “re-education camp” for an indeterminate time period.

    • glock19fan February 28, 2020, 9:25 pm

      “Re-education Camp” – as in Gulag” eh?

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:14 am

      Excellent idea, man who is to scared to identify himself. I’ll bring it up at the next meeting of re-education camp faculty

  • john February 28, 2020, 11:06 am

    Where are the modern day Sons of Liberty?

    Do these Sheriff’s know the authority that they have?

    Deputize every citizen in your county and do what needs to be done.

    Arrest and prosecute these oath breakers for TREASON!!!

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL OFFICIAL ACTS

    Any unconstitutional act of an official will at least be a violation of the oath of that official to execute the duties of his office, and therefore grounds for his removal from office.

    No official immunity or privileges of rank or position survive the commission of unlawful acts.

    If it violates the rights of individuals, it is also likely to be a crime, and the it obligates anyone aware of such a violation to investigate it, gather evidence for a prosecution, make an arrest, and if necessary, seek an indictment from a grand jury, and if one is obtained, prosecute the offender in a court of law.

    https://www.constitution.org/uslaw/16amjur2nd.htm

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:16 am

      Ohhh… I get it – this is a pickle barrel bitch session. A place to air ignorant fantasies while you chew and spit. Rock on, boys – you’re harmless enough

  • Nicholas February 28, 2020, 11:05 am

    In Norton v Shelby County, 118 US 425, the court ruled; “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
    In Miranda v Arizona 384 U.S. 436, the court ruled; “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”
    There are many cases that can be quoted. For instance, in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 the court ruled; “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.”
    However, unless “We the People” take up our rightful positions as REQUIRED by the Constitution, all the protests, and all the citing, and all the boasting about how many guns we have mean absolutely nothing unless we take up our lawful position “to execute the Laws of the Union…” as required by the Constitution.
    Andrew Jackson commenting on Chief Justice John Marshall’s ruling in Worcester v. Georgia, said, “John Marshall has made his decision. Now let him enforce it.” It is up to us “to execute the Laws of the Union”, and when those laws are violated, it is up to us to convene, indict, arrest, and try the likes of Gov. Grisham, and all her supporters in Moms Demand Action for acts of subversion, and sedition.

    • Nicholas February 28, 2020, 2:40 pm

      It is so unfortunate that those who believe themselves to be supporters of the right to keep and bear arms want nothing at all with the Duty that would secure the right. Not only that right but also all of our rights.

      The notion that the 2nd amendment individual right argument is the proper argument displays a basic ignorance of the fundamentals of this nations doctrines of law.

      • Scott February 28, 2020, 9:30 pm

        The right to keep and bear arms is recognized by the second amendment NOT created by it. The right already exists. Read the entire bill of rights. Then read the literally hundreds of quotes by the men who wrote it. All were very clear. The Government has no right to regulate arms. Period. The intent was for the people to NEVER be outgunned by our government. Any gun law is an infringement.

      • Adam Jeppson February 29, 2020, 11:07 am

        Please educate us in what those duties are. Short of voting and being politically aware, I am unsure what those duties are. As I stated before, educate me.

    • SD February 29, 2020, 8:42 am

      I’m no lawyer but your argument seems to be violated in many situations. If “the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” how do you explain “gun free zones” otherwise known as mass murder targets?

  • Grant Stevens February 28, 2020, 10:42 am

    Until the Second Amendment is repealed, it remains the supreme law of the land. Any politician who authors, supports or signs legislation that infringes upon the unalienable right of American citizens to keep and bear arms is violating their oath to the Constitution and should be immediately removed from office and summarily punished. Any judge who rules against the Second Amendment right of American citizens to keep and bear arms should be immediately removed from the bench and summarily punished. Any government bureaucrat who imposes rules and regulations that infringe upon the unalienable right of American citizens to keep and bear arms is committing a felony and should be immediately removed from office and summarily punished. Any law enforcement officer or agent who enforces laws or regulations that infringe upon the unalienable right of American citizens to keep and bear arms should be immediately terminated and summarily punished. “Shall not be infringed” means just what it says. The solution to crime is not more unconstitutional “gun control” laws, but stiff, mandatory punishment for anyone using a firearm to commit a crime – no bail, no plea bargaining, no mercy.

    • I Love Liberty February 28, 2020, 12:16 pm

      I agree. And do you think if government authorities seize any private firearms under these Red Flag Gun Confiscation laws that they will ever be returned to the rightful owner? This is only “temporarily seizing private gun from citizens.” That is a huge lie. Once they take firearms away from a citizen they will never get them back.

    • Steven Teach February 28, 2020, 8:32 pm

      And who I ask is going to do the removing ? You say they should be removed immediately….By whom …I have been asking this for months,and no-one, I repeat NO-ONE has an answer…Is it the responsibility of the citizenry or Law enforcement, or the attorneys generals Job…Everyone says remove them ,but, NO-ONE can tell me how…..We are all doomed because NO-ONE has the guts to do it..

    • Eric December 28, 2020, 7:22 am

      Too bad your fantasies are impotent and irrelevant, ey? You must be very frustrated that your incredibly uninformed ruminations are totally ignored every single day by government officials who have absolutely no respect for you or your night sweats. Seek help.

  • Norm Fishler February 28, 2020, 10:25 am

    All across New Mexico I see highly extended single middle digits being extended toward our Gov. She has publicly stated that she wants New Mexico to be made into the likeness of California. Every day I hear rumbling from even the Hispanic community about how disliked she is. I wish she’d resign, move there and put New Mexico out of her misery.

  • Fred Gasparino February 28, 2020, 9:47 am

    Funny how the left likes to pick and choose the laws they decide to enforce. Immigration laws? Pffft they don’t have time for those. Gun used in the commission of a crime? Plead it out to a lesser charge.

    • Boz February 28, 2020, 10:39 am

      Exactly correct!

    • Richard Robinson February 28, 2020, 1:32 pm

      And, here in WA state, and others, “sanctuary cities” don’t allow law endorsement to enforce Federal laws.

  • TW February 28, 2020, 9:45 am

    Enforce or resign. Do as you say, New Mexico Governor. Enforce Federal immigration laws, or resign.

    • Roger February 28, 2020, 12:40 pm

      If politicians can’t or won’t follow the constitution,but try to follow their own agenda, they should be recalled,or fired.they can’t be bothered getting criminal illegals or illegal aliens out of the country.Then get rid of them.

  • Robert J. Lucas February 28, 2020, 9:36 am

    Anti-Constitutionalist’s=Anti-Americans=Enemies of the United States…

  • mark christenberry February 28, 2020, 9:10 am

    This is what I want to know. If you are charged in a crime and someone dies in its commission, you will be charged with murder. And then to die from lethal injection. We all know people are going to die as States confiscates there guns. With the governor and all involved knowing this is unconstitutional (a crime). Then after the US Supreme court says they have wrongfully taken the guns will all involved be charged with murder and put down by lethal injection? The problem is no one, NO ONE pays for the lives lost in this stuff. Politicos should be forced to take this stuff to the Supreme Court first. All lives matter. It sure seems the dems want to kill as many as they can as fast as they can until forced to stop by the Supreme Court.

  • Ben Kundick jr February 28, 2020, 8:47 am

    No, governor, you are the one who needs to resign, you communist wench!!!

  • Whathappenedto mycountry February 28, 2020, 8:20 am

    I hope she gets run over by someone that had their guns taken away.

    • PB- dave February 28, 2020, 11:01 am

      you’ve made a point ( backhandedly ) do they impound their vehicles? kitchen knives? bows? hand tools?
      If they are TRULY a threat, what measures are taken to protect them and the public ?
      In the past people were served a warrant and held for a couple days to be professionally evaluated, all based on some real evidence gathered or sworn to.
      It’s pretty clear when the focus is on the object instead of the people or situation.

      • Bran Wrox February 29, 2020, 11:58 am

        This means law enforcement must enforce laws.

        The governor will watch and applaud as illegal aliens are being arrested & deported.

      • Bran Wrox February 29, 2020, 11:59 am

        This means law enforcement must enforce laws.

        The governor will watch and applaud as iIIegal aIiens are being arrested & deported.

  • Linda Johnson February 28, 2020, 8:13 am

    I wonder why the gun-control advocates think that the mayors and governors of sanctuary cities and sanctuary states, who don’t uphold immigration laws and ICE detainers, shouldn’t resign too?

  • Ursus Logicus February 28, 2020, 7:58 am

    STOP the self-destructive impulses. Vote NOT Democrat. Ever. Anywhere. Any level. Any office.

    Ignoring this axiom is the political equivalent of cultivating Ebola virions in your kitchen.

  • Lorenzo Serna February 28, 2020, 7:44 am

    All you have to do is let them taste their own medicine. “ Yea is this the sheriffs office? Yea I don’t think that that Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham is fit to own any guns so can we apply the red flag law on her??

    • D.J. February 28, 2020, 1:02 pm

      I doubt that would be effective . I am certain the communist princess
      has well armed security forces provided to her , at taxpayers expense .

  • Julius Kropok February 28, 2020, 7:26 am

    When did any gun control ever stop a shooting it has always been a nut job or just a flat out felon to do the killing and we the law abiding citizens always pay the price with laws that limits are wright’s and the criminals could care less about the law so this is just a nother do nothing law to stop shooting’s I think it is time to start voting these people out of office

  • Dr Motown February 28, 2020, 7:18 am

    Lefto-fascism is rearing its ugly head again…..and they have more followers than ever thanks to school indoctrination and broken border security

  • 3M WOJ8 February 28, 2020, 7:11 am

    To the gun-owners in New Mexico…..

    When the red-flag carrying thugs – they’re not to be considered LEOs anymore – come for you just spray them with an element that rhymes and ends with two.

    And to the governor of NM, you’re just another f***ing D-rat c-word who isn’t worth the gum on the bottom of my shoe.

  • Paul Betz February 28, 2020, 6:55 am

    I hope they either resign, or at least do a 30 day walkout. Let the voting public and liberal gun grabbers live without them for a month or two. Gun owners and sporting clubs should run fundraisers and food drives to support them.

  • Anthony Romano February 28, 2020, 6:52 am

    When was the last time a red flag law stopped a crime? Vote these people out of office!!’

  • David Fiedeldey February 28, 2020, 6:30 am

    No, dont resign and dont enforce unconstitutional laws…you took an oath to the constitution, not anti-American libtard gun laws….

  • Kb31416 February 28, 2020, 6:07 am

    I’ve got a better idea: the governor should abide by the constitution and bill of rights, or she should resign.

  • Steve in Detroit February 28, 2020, 6:07 am

    The goal is to make all gun owners criminal. Bloomberg is behind the “Every Town” groups. These despicable politicians view the Constitution as a old, outdated piece of paper. These Elites want to take away your guns, but keep their armed security that has real Assault Weapons, not semi auto MSR’s. A slippery slope we are on.

  • J. A. Young February 28, 2020, 4:53 am

    Stop electing these nitwit Democrats! Get out and vote to put people in power that actually represent you. If we don’t give the power to the DNC then we won’t have to fight as hard to protect our rights.

  • Gus February 28, 2020, 4:52 am

    Start recalling them and voting them out. They are using the ploy of public safety to disarm innocent America and “re-write” the constitution, meaning they are tearing it up to suit themselves, not the people.

  • FLHawkI February 28, 2020, 4:32 am

    Red flag laws violate the Bill Of Rights:
    1. First Amendment: Freedom of Speech. If you say the wrong thing to the wrong person they come an take your guns.
    2. Second Amendment: “The right to bear arms shall not be infringed”.
    3. Fourth Amendment: Unreasonable search and seizure without a warrant.
    4. Fifth Amendment: Trial by jury, not to be deprived of life, liberty or property without a trial by jury.
    5. Sixth Amendment: due process – speedy trial by jury, to be informed of the law that was broken, right of a defense lawyer.
    6. Seventh Amendment: Can not be deprived of any property over $ 20.00 with out a trial by jury.

    So yes it destroys the US Constitution. Tell me which one of those amendments above it does not violate. Sorry folks but the US Constitution is still and always will be the supreme law of the land!

  • David Hammack February 28, 2020, 3:27 am

    Enforce or resign? Sheriffs are elected, same as the Governor, and just like the Governor, they each took an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, ABOVE all else. Just because she broke her oath, it doesn’t mean she can force them to break theirs.

    • Justin February 28, 2020, 7:59 am

      Exactly! That sums it up very well.
      The Sheriffs should not resign, and get some high powered legal counsel to file lawsuits against those traitors. She cannot force them to resign, and I doubt that she would be so stupid to fire them, and I don’t think she can fire them anyway. If she does try to fire them, then they have solid grounds for a solid lawsuit.

      “In other words, the focus is on simply confiscating firearms — not on addressing the true source of the potential danger, the individual.”
      “Sheriff Mace told local media that the association has retained an attorney and is going to pursue the matter further via legal channels.”

  • SuperG February 27, 2020, 11:06 am

    Just another law to abuse the mentally ill, deny them their Constitutional rights, and then do nothing to help them.

  • John W. Raccasi February 27, 2020, 9:47 am

    Sorry, that was suppose to be, “how many people”, because they are not my people……one of my dogs was trying to steal my stepsons waffle!

  • John W. Raccasi February 27, 2020, 9:41 am

    It’s amazing how my people think they are Judge Dredd.

  • Charlotte February 27, 2020, 8:09 am

    Sheriffs swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. Not the law so to speak. If the law violates the Constitution, they are under no obligation to enforce it. This woman seems to forget Sheriffs are typically elected. They are not appointed like police officers.

  • Hill411 February 26, 2020, 7:38 pm

    The Red Flag Law is a two edged sword. If someone were to report Governor Lujan Grisham as a threat to society, per her statement, Law Enforcement could break down her door and take whatever action they seemed necessary to locate and confiscate a ‘weapon’. I wonder how many calls will be made(?).

    • Hillary lost, get over it. February 28, 2020, 7:44 am

      Oh, that is good. I think that should happen to every person that votes for these traitorous laws.

  • Kestryll February 26, 2020, 4:22 pm

    Shut up Karen, the Sheriffs are doing what you should be doing which is following the Constitution.

  • Bobs your uncle February 26, 2020, 3:08 pm

    In Commierado a woman whose son was killed by a police officer has claimed she must have protection under Colorado red flag statute, she forgot the part about the sons knife attack and threats to other family and police which resulted in him being shot.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend