Sheriff’s statement: “The first word that comes to my mind is extortion.”

An Injustice Against our Citizens

Monday, March 4, 2013, was unlike any day I’ve experienced in my 12 years testifying at the Colorado State Capitol. During my tenure, I’ve had numerous opportunities to participate in legislative processes from draft proposal to signature of a bill making it law.

I’ve witnessed many hearings and observed citizens, law enforcement, and special interest groups share opinions on a variety of proposed laws. I’ve witnessed very controversial bills set in a process to allow full access from supporters, opponents, and citizens to be heard by their legislators. On numerous occasions, bills similar in nature were set for hearing on different days to ensure opportunity for anyone to participate in the deliberative process. On Monday, this didn’t occur. Instead, gun bills were simultaneously scheduled and of 25 plus sheriffs, only one could testify per bill. Hearings were split so bills heard simultaneously were on different floors, even though all were heard by senate committees. Rules for testimony changed three times from Thursday afternoon through Monday at 10:30 am, when hearings began.

Historically, any citizen would be allowed to speak if they arrived at the Capitol early and signed up on testimony records. Although sign up sheets were in place and citizens including myself signed up, we were completely disregarded. Minutes after I signed up to testify, I learned a different process would be utilized and testimony was based on three categories: experts, preferred witnesses, and public witnesses. No explanation was provided to define expert or preferred witness. I was told this decision was made by the senate president and the chairperson of the hearing committee. Additionally, experts would have no time constraints and all others would be restricted to three minutes. I was completely disheartened at what I was witnessing and this was exacerbated when I learned experts included an individual that was not a resident of Colorado who had no credentials to qualify as an expert except his spouse was a victim of the Tuscan Arizona shooting. He admitted he had not read the proposed bill and could not speak to any specifics regarding this bill. He encouraged Colorado to adopt universal background checks and close the gun show loophole, both of which already exist. Sadly, he testified with unlimited restriction as voters and taxpayers of this state sat helplessly as they were denied the right to testify during committee hearings.

My colleague, Sheriff John Cooke, testified in opposition of the “Universal Background Check” bill on behalf of most sheriffs while staying within the three minute constraint. Fortunately, I was allowed to testify because a member of the legislature listed me as an expert witness. I was honored and brought statistics and facts as it related to the national insta-check system (NICS); the probable criminalization of law abiding citizens and the unenforceability of this particular bill. I offered other options knowing we all share the common goal of reducing violence. I was proud to represent my constituents and the majority of our sheriffs. That pride was quickly diminished as I departed the hearing room and witnessed hundreds of citizens who would not be given the opportunity to testify. Although they expressed their sincere appreciation for my comments, I recognized the injustice that was unfolding before my eyes. Citizens of Colorado were prevented from participating in the legislative process. Their rights had been overridden by the agenda of a few members of the State Senate.

As I made my way out of the Capitol, I was shocked at the number of people who attended these hearings. It’s estimated the number of people in attendance reached 1,000. I spoke to several and was told they just wanted their voice to be heard. Many of them had never been to the Capitol, let alone testified on any bill. Some brought their children as a lesson in civics and sacrificed a day at work to participate in the law making process. Unfortunately, what they hoped for never happened.

Due to a prior commitment, I could not stay for the remaining bills. Later, I phoned a member of our legislature and expressed concern for what I had witnessed; changing of rules, time limits, new classification of speakers to establish priority and most of all the number of citizens who made the journey to the Capitol in hopes of being heard. I was told the rules did change several times and that this was very unusual. These changes were driven by the majority leadership, Senator John Morse, and the chairperson of the involved hearing committee.

I am not sharing this because of the outcome of the hearings that day; rather I am sharing this because of the process implemented and the faces of all those citizens that were never permitted to participate in the process. Government is supposed to be by the people, for the people and on this day, they were crushed and kicked to the side. Special interest coalitions and hand picked experts with no relevant expertise trumped our citizens.

To add insult to injury, the following Wednesday, I received an email containing the following language from a member of County Sheriffs Of Colorado: “…I have been advised by a reliable source at the Capitol that the Dems are seriously not pleased with the CSOC positions on the gun bills, and given the potential for a real salary bill to be introduced as you shall see from a follow-up email from” (an unnamed sheriff), “support of SB197 would put us in a more favorable light for salary bill support from the Dems. I do not believe we would be sacrificing our principles or positions on the other gun bills by supporting SB197.” “…Please let us know what you think on this proposal ASAP as I need to get a letter from us to the Senate Dems before the close of business today.” As I see it, senate Dems have made it known, “sheriffs, obey or no pay for you.” The first word that comes to my mind is extortion. Again, I’m disheartened that the pay of sheriffs is threatened to gain compliance with the majority party leadership. Local elected officials’ pay is set by the legislature as stated in Colorado Law. The previous governor’s process brought the need for a pay increase before the legislature and that legislature is attempting to buy compliance. I have great admiration for my fellow sheriffs; they are true professionals with high morals and principles. Having served with many of them for years, I can say they are men of honor with a passion to serve and do what’s right. I will not speak for them, but I personally will not concede to these threats, stand by while coercive acts such as this go without mention, nor will I compromise my values and beliefs for a justified pay raise based on studies performed by a bi-partisan commission formed by the democrat leadership. To be clear, this salary recommendation would have no affect on me, as I am term limited. Setting salaries is the responsibility of the legislature. This authority should not be used as a tool of coercion, but unfortunately it appears to have become such a device and there is nothing to suggest otherwise.

- Sheriff Terry Maketa”

via Sheriff Maketa releases statement regarding gun control stance | News – Home.

Is it paranoia when they do intend to take away guns? Here it is, folks.

“Here it is. This is the video where I was asked to keep the Democrat proposals for the NY SAFE Act away from the public. This list was given to me by a colleague and it is not confidential.

This bill was an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Democrats clearly wanted to dismantle the work of the Founding Fathers. None of these amendments were included in the final bill thanks to us fighting back. I will not stand silent while these unpatriotic proposals are pathetically thrown at us a 11 o’clock at night:

  1. Confiscation of “assault weapons”
  2. Confiscation o ten round clips
  3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
  4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder’s information to be replaced to the public
  5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as “assault weapons”
  6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
  7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
  8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
  9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
  10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
  11. State issued pistol permits
  12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
  13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
  14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
  15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons

 

NY Assemblyman exposes real gun control CONFISCATION agenda of Democrats » The Right Scoop -.

Soft tyranny, small business edition

“Last month, the feds swooped down on a successful Maryland dairy business, South Mountain Creamery, seizing $70,000 in its bank accounts and formally charging its owners, Randy and Karen Sowers, with the offense of bank “structuring.” Based in Middletown, outside Frederick, South Mountain has thrived as a direct-to-consumer seller at farmer’s markets and other food events in Baltimore and elsewhere around the region. That means it does a lot of cash business, which helped get it in trouble. The feds charged last month that Randy Sowers had been arranging bank deposits so as not to put in more than $10,000 at once, a threshold that triggers the requirement to file paperwork with the feds. There was no allegation that Mr. Sowers was engaged in tax evasion or other underlying illegality, aside from seeking to avoid large deposits.

Few among the general public realize it, but splitting up large bank deposits to avoid the need to file federal reports on them constitutes a criminal offense known as “structuring” under something called the Bank Secrecy Act. The idea is that the reporting requirement helps federal investigators detect some instances of drug money laundering and terrorist finance, and that if a pattern of repeated $9,000 deposits were not also banned, the law would be too easily evaded. In fact, the feds instruct banks to report suspicious patterns of sub-threshold deposits, and not to warn customers that they are doing so. When the Supreme Court ruled in 1994 that the law would not support a conviction unless defendants knew the practice was illegal, Congress promptly passed a bill striking out the willfulness requirement.”

via A trap for small businesses – baltimoresun.com.

Yet Another Fire Originating From Yet Another Gov Subsidized Car. There’s More. . .

“Last week, a fire badly damaged the home of a new Fisker Karma owner, and authorities are saying that the electric car was the source of the blaze,” Autoweek’s David Arnouts reports.

You may recall that Fisker Automotive is the same “green” car company the Department of Energy awarded a $529 million federal loan guarantee in April, 2010. You may also recall that after receiving $190 million of said DOE loan, Fisker failed to make its sales goals and instead went through two — count them, two! — rounds of layoffs.

The fire was started by the Fisker and it spread to the house, says Fort Bend County, TX, chief fire investigator Robert Baker.

“Yes, the Karma was the origin of the fire, but what exactly caused that we don’t know at this time,” he said.

Lucky for Jeremy Gutierrez, the owner of the Karma, no one in his family was hurt and only a portion of his house went up in flames. His brand new car, however, wasn’t so lucky. It was destroyed.

via Investigator Claims Gov’t-Subsidized Electric Car Caused Garage Fire, Automaker Responds With ‘SWAT Team’ of Engineers & Inspectors | TheBlaze.com.