Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

n2doc

(47,953 posts)
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 09:44 PM Feb 2013

Montana Bill Would Let Sheriffs Arrest FBI Agents for Arresting People

—By Tim Murphy | Thu Feb. 21, 2013 3:01 AM PST

If Montana voters approve Gary Marbut's referendum in November 2014, any FBI agent who tries to arrest a Montanan for a federal crime could be arrested—and charged with kidnapping.

Marbut's "Sheriffs First" bill, which cleared a Montana state Senate committee last week, makes it a crime for a federal agent to take any law-enforcement steps without first getting permission from the county sheriff. The proposal already passed both houses of the Legislature once, in 2011, but was vetoed by then-Gov. Brian Schweitzer, a Democrat. This time Marbut, the Montana gun lobbyist and aspiring firearms manufacturer who wrote the bill, is hoping Montana voters will determine the fate of his legislation. If passed, the latest version of the Sheriffs First measure would become a ballot question in November 2014.

The FBI's deadly 1993 raid on cult leader David Koresh's Waco, Texas, compound might never have happened if the Sheriffs First law was in place, Marbut argues. The sheriff "could have said, 'Look, I will call Koresh on the phone and he'll meet at my office and you can ask him whatever questions you want. You don't have to incinerate 100-and-some people.'" But under the Sheriffs First law, Marbut's imagined conversation wouldn't be the simple information exchange he describes. Instead, it would be a request for permission: The FBI would have had to ask the local sheriff before initiating a raid on Koresh's compound—and the local sheriff could have said no.

That's because the real focus of the Sheriffs First law's isn't interdepartmental communication; it's de facto nullification. If a sheriff believes a federal law is in conflict with a state law, he could prevent federal agents from enforcing it. In designating local sheriffs as essentially a new form of checks and balances, Marbut's bill would empower the very law enforcement officers who have been most critical of perceived federal overreach. As Reason reported last month, at least 90 sheriffs departments have pledged to not enforce any gun control laws they consider to be unconstitutional.

more
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/02/montana-sheriffs-gary-marbut-fbi-gun-legislation

12 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
4. I was going to ask a question on a similar point
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 09:52 PM
Feb 2013

Suppose a state passed a law to arrest DEA agents arresting owners of a licensed MMJ dispensary?

Nuclear Unicorn

(19,497 posts)
8. I've no doubt you're 100% correct
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:41 PM
Feb 2013

But then the sheriff would retaliate by arresting anyone coming to arrest him and so it would go back and forth. That makes me think that it then becomes a contest of wills, public relations and a hot mess of a legal situation. It kinda comes down to, "Do ya really wanna go there for this?"

However, be that as it may, I was more interested in the level of support from members of DU to where we would draw the line if it were an issue we were more sympathetic towards.

 

jberryhill

(62,444 posts)
9. Uh, no, it won't go down that way
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:43 PM
Feb 2013

If an armed person resists arrest by the FBI, that's the end of the story right there. Sherrifs are regularly arrested and tried on federal charges.

DollarBillHines

(1,922 posts)
3. Sheer genius.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 09:49 PM
Feb 2013

"Well, lemme tell ya. Bobby Wayne is just a good ol' boy and we ain't had all that much trouble with him. He comes from a good famlee, too. Let me make a few phone calls an' I'll git back to ya."

PSPS

(13,599 posts)
5. "You don't have to incinerate 100-and-some people."
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 09:54 PM
Feb 2013
The sheriff "could have said, 'Look, I will call Koresh on the phone and he'll meet at my office and you can ask him whatever questions you want. You don't have to incinerate 100-and-some people.'"

You know you're dealing with a lunatic when they start spouting this tired fiction. The rest is just a side order of even more lunacy.
 

Tagish_Charlie

(85 posts)
6. It is a good idea,the FBI is not to be trusted
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:07 PM
Feb 2013

That said, since the FBI has no sense of humor, all this law, if enacted, would accomplish is getting county Sheriffs arrested or shot. Besides the FBI isn't too big on asking the local yokels permission to make arrests. They do their thing and the locals can put on their big boy boxers and deal with it

Gidney N Cloyd

(19,838 posts)
11. Plenty of local cops aren't either. I'm thinking Arpaio in Arizona for starters.
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 10:52 PM
Feb 2013

Imagine what Capone could have done with a law like this. Buy up the local guys and let them take care of Eliott Ness

sorefeet

(1,241 posts)
12. The feds busted several medical marijuana
Thu Feb 21, 2013, 11:24 PM
Feb 2013

businesses in Montana and the SHERIFF was more than happy to assist. So were the city police.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Montana Bill Would Let Sh...