Dare sheriff gets 3rd degree on 2nd amendment

By on February 4, 2013

 Doughtie spoke to the Outer Banks Tea Party.

Doughtie spoke to the Outer Banks Tea Party.

In what had to be one of the more unusual speaking engagements by a local law enforcement official, Dare County Sheriff Doug Doughtie addressed the Outer Banks Tea Party this past Thursday.

An overflow crowd at the Western Sizzling restaurant in Kill Devil Hills was eager to hear Doughtie’s stance on constitutional issues, particularly as they related to proposed legislation on semi-automatic weapons, magazines and clips.

Various bills and comments from President Obama, Vice President Biden and Democratic leaders in the House and Senate have raised concerns among many conservatives, libertarians and supporters of a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment.

Before taking questions from the audience, Doughtie spoke to the crowd and emphasized his support of Second Amendment rights.

While not directly stating opposition to possible legislation banning the sale and transfer of various types of weapons, accessories and ammunition, Doughtie urged the crowd to “stand up now for their rights.” He said he never thought “I would have to stand before you” and be concerned about gun ownership rights.

The vast majority of the Outer Banks Tea Party members were satisfied with the sheriff’s expression of support for gun ownership.

But a handful of attendees pressed Doughtie on hypothetical issues involving possible federal intervention in ownership of firearms.

Three members of the audience pointed to confiscation of guns by federal, state and local authorities in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. One asked Doughtie what he would do if President Obama sent “his goons” to seize guns in the aftermath of a local disaster.

Others broached the issue of “nullification,” a concept in which state or local governments refuse to enforce federal laws or executive orders they may deem contrary to the Constitution.

In nearby Beaufort County, the county Board of Commissioners, which consists of Democrats and Republicans, recently passed a resolution said to be the first in the nation that would nullify any restrictions on gun ownership considered unconstitutional by the county board. See video »

Other members of the audience cited the actions of Linn County, Oregon Sheriff Tim Mueller, who sent a letter to Vice President Biden saying he would refuse to enforce “any federal regulation enacted by Congress or by executive order of the President offending the constitutional rights of my citizens.”

Doughtie said his office would uphold the Constitution and laws passed by Congress. He told the audience that his office was not bound by executive orders the president might sign.

The sheriff also said he was not willing to “dance on the same thin line” as his Oregon counterpart.

At least two members of the audience tried to force Doughtie to state whether he would actively intervene against federal officials who might attempt to confiscate guns under a martial law or “state of emergency” scenario.

The same audience members also pressed Doughtie on whether his office would allow federal agents to commit search and seizure actions they felt were violations of the Fourth Amendment.

The sheriff reiterated his office would not contravene laws passed by Congress nor would the sheriff’s office prevent federal law enforcement agencies from exercising their authority in situations where their jurisdiction was clearly established.

At one point, during a rather terse exchange between the sheriff and two audience members, Doughtie rejected arguments that interpretation of “natural rights” and “inalienable rights” such as those mentioned in the Constitution required him and his deputies to resist, or even “fight” with federal law enforcement officials deemed in violation of those rights.

Former Manteo police chief and unsuccessful 2012 Republican primary candidate for the Dare County Board of Commissioners Francis D’Ambra spoke several times, supporting Doughtie’s positions and reminding the audience of the balance between federal and local law enforcement jurisdictions.

D’Ambra also cautioned the crowd not to overstate the ability of federal authorities to deploy enough personnel for confiscation and search and seizure under the worst-case scenarios that concerned some members of the audience.

Bookmark and Share


Comments

Jana Murray

March 25, 2013 12:46 pm

If Doug Doughtie is truly a Constitutional sheriff upholding his oath, why does he ignore requests that he join the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, CSPOA? Thirteen NC Sheriffs have taken the time to join here: http://cspoa.org/sheriffs-gun-rights/

seriouslyfolks

February 15, 2013 10:30 am

People who try to belittle others for watching Fox News while collecting their talking points from CNN or Daily Show on Comedy Central are just as equally ill informed as the Fox viewer.

observer

February 15, 2013 6:32 am

Absolutely correct and surely we’re going to hear the same from the folks in DC before it is over. Start sliding the slippery slope and it is easier to gain speed than it is to stop. Be careful what you ask for! More folks are killed texting behind the wheel every year and we don’t see anything at all being done about that.
So we all must be bad crazy folks? Do you really think that there won’t be anymore nut cases going off just because a new law is written?

Salvo duck hunter

February 14, 2013 1:25 pm

You could argue that a single steel jacketed bullet from a Ruger # 1 could kill a half dozen people but it is not likely, ditto with the 00 buck. The large majority of the mass killings in the last 30 years have been done with semi auto handguns and assult rifles not revolvers or shotguns.
I don’t find your analogies very convincing. It is not about what could be it is what has happened. I’m done, you can have the last word.

observer

February 14, 2013 7:14 am

Ducky you’re never going to get rid of or be able to ban the root cause and that is crazy people filled with hate or some other insane motive. Ted Bundy never used a gun, Tim Mcveigh never used a gun, the Uni-bomber no gun and the list goes on and on.
” the abilities of the hateful and insane are only limited by the imagination of the participants”.
One could argue that due to the number of projectiles per round in a shotgun shell that you could generate as many as 65 possible hits from 5 shots out of your shotgun if shooting 00 buckshot,,,,,,,,be careful what you ask for old man!

Salvo duck hunter

February 13, 2013 5:38 pm

Then we disagree because I can buy a 30 round clip for a AR 15 that will take me about 2 sec to change for a fresh one and I can’t do that with my Benelli or Remington BDL. I would be ok if people had to jump through the same hoops to own a semi auto military assault weapon that they do for a fully automatic one because I don’t read about massacres happening with those weapons. I believe military designed assault rifles (and pistols) belong in the Armory and the hands of professionals, not cilivians. Seat belts don’t save everyone but they do make people safer, banning assault weapons will do the same.

observer

February 13, 2013 12:07 pm

Duck hunter; FYI;it is currently (for like 50 years) a crime to own (unregistered and licensed), transfer or transport across state lines a fully automatic firearm. There are people that do own fully automatic firearms that are legally owned in our community. Every incidence of the ownership from storage to history is quite effectively regulated. These are not the firearms that are the issue of the discussion here, at issue are semi automatic firearms. No different from the Benellis and Remingtons a bunch of us hunters own. Law abiding firearm owners and the firearms they own and enjoy in this country are not the cause of the bad events that have come to pass. Are you a bad person because you own a firearm.
I stated awhile back that the proposed definition of an “assault weapon” is so broad that it can actually be interpreted (hopefully incorrectly) to include a nail gun and depending on the stock; your Benelli too!

Salvo duck hunter

February 12, 2013 8:32 pm

Alright where do you draw the line? Why are fully automatic weapons banned? Should they be banned?

JH

February 12, 2013 10:57 am

I, along with all of you, was shocked and horrified by what happened at Sandy Hook School. Those were beautiful, innocent children.

A few points:

1) Can anyone explain how the “Gun Free School Zone” helped those children in Newtown ?

2) Did the “Gun Free School Zone” help the kids at Columbine HS or Virginia Tech?

3) The person responsible for that massacre was Adam Lanza. The second most responsible was his mother for giving him access to weapons even though he had mental issues. Sadly, she paid for this mistake with her life.

4)Why do liberal minded people have some overwhelming need to somehow feel responsible for these acts?

Relax, … it was not your fault ! It certainly was not my fault !!

5) There are sick and evil people in this world who do not care about laws. If the proposed knee Jerk reactionary regulations are passed, will there not be an out cry if someone else kills 9 children and then himself with a 10 round magazine? Will they then look to limit people to 1 bullet at a time?

When the next deranged individual decides to shoot his way through a security door to enter a school and kill people, the only person who will stop him will be someone with a gun, whether an administrator, a teacher, a maintenance worker, a police officer or a security guard.

To help prevent or fight fires in schools, are there not sprinkler systems and fire extinguishers ?

6) If you have not heard of retired Army Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, who wrote a book “Killing”, I suggest you look him up. He makes an analogy that some people in life are sheep and others sheepdogs.

The sheepdogs protect the sheep against the wolves.

If someone decides to be a sheep, that’s their choice. I choose to be a sheepdog.

observer

February 11, 2013 1:51 pm

Duck hunter; you missed the point!

Salvo duck hunter

February 10, 2013 7:52 pm

Observer,
You can have the nail gun (and compressor and generator) and I’ll rely on my Benelli SBE.
By your logic we should be allowed to erect Pillboxes on top of our houses with 50 cal machine guns and maybe one in the back of our Toyota, like they do in SomIlia.

Krafty

February 10, 2013 7:38 pm

A wealthy Italian Roman Catholic kid goes nuts with a gun in upscale Newtown, CT, and I am going to give up my Second Amendment Rights because of it. I don’t think so.

Winston Smith

February 10, 2013 2:21 pm

Worthy of consideration for the more skeptical members of the pro-2nd Amendment crowd:

From 2/4/13 Outer Banks Voice interview with Sheriff re: gangs on the Outer Banks:

Cooperation is also increasing with federal agencies. Many people don’t realize that while it is a crime to lie to a federal officer under questioning, lying to a local police officer is not .

“We now have six local officers sworn as federal authorities,” Doughtie said. “When we catch someone, we tell them, “lying to us is a crime. If we find out you lied, you’re going to jail. It gives us leverage.”

How does this play out in implementing Federal gun directives that may contradict the will of the local population? Where do these 6 officers primary loyalties lie? Keep asking questions…

Bob Samuels

February 10, 2013 10:03 am

Constitutional Interpretation – that’s what it all boils down to. It’s like the Bible. Read it as you wish. When the SCOTUS goes 5-4 liberal (5-4 conservative now) gun laws will be interpreted differently. We as nation, will always continue to change and evolve over time.
Fortunately, Sheriff Doughtie understands the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution, which he has sworn to uphold and defend.

observer

February 10, 2013 7:36 am

Be careful what you ask for,,,,By the proposed definition of “assault weapon” a carpenter would be using an “assault weapon to build you a new home.
Nail gun features;
- holds more than ten shots
- semi automatic
- pistol grip
- detachable magazine
We need to be cautious of writing stupid laws that weaken necessary laws with definitions so broad that they can be interpreted to include whatever tool that exist. The example above is just how stupid this talk about “assault weapons” is getting. At the end of the day no restriction of ownership and or use of ANY firearm known to mankind will make law abiding citizens safer. We have the right to keep and bear arms for a reason and that reason is not hunting. Criminals and people that have bad intent do not read laws or abide by them anymore than the neighbors dog respects the property line when it has to go poop and they never will. We are talking about devices that are simple to make, directions available on youtube!

Salvo duck hunter

February 10, 2013 7:34 am

Russ excuse me, really. Being a avid hunter and having no problem with firearms for personal protection I see a big difference between weapons designed for military ( assult weapons with high capacity clips) and 6 shot revolvers, bolt action rifles and 5 shot semi auto shotguns.
I put military assault rifles in the same class as hand grenades and 50 cal machine guns. I misread what you added to a previous comment I submitted. If people want to own those other weapons they should be locked up in the Armory and checked out for target shooting or to defend the state.

Concerned

February 9, 2013 2:05 pm

Everybody just relax and turn on MSNBC, they tell you nothing but the truth. LOL….

Vballer

February 8, 2013 9:32 pm

What do you think gives you the right to come here and post stupid and untrue comments about conservatives?? Oh yeah the 1st amendment! What do you think let’s the 1st or any of them to exist?? That’s right know it alls, the 2nd does! Along with the armed forces that protect all of the amendments. Some of you should have your 1st amendment rights taken away for being stupid and not paying more attention in history and civics class! Why don’t go back, and do some homework before you come on here and start useless name calling! All of our freedoms are being slowly taken away, get you head of your rear end and open your eyes!!!

H.L

February 8, 2013 5:27 pm

I have a good reason for possessing so called “assault rifles” . Who’s going to fight against you when there is a coup attempt or some other kind of governmental transition? The military. Do you really think that it couldn’t happen here? Does anyone really think that the USA is going to be around forever without another civil war or power grab attempt? For the rest of eternity? Forever? And do any of you really want to fight any sort of war with bolt action rifles and seven bullet magazines? But then again, in order to fight to preserve something you first have to believe in something. Just look at the Afghans…

Dave

February 8, 2013 10:40 am

NOBODY is going to take your guns! IF the gov’t really wanted to come after you, they’re going to do it with drones, Apache Helicopters, F-18′s, M1A1 tanks, fully automatic 50 cal machine guns mounted on humvees, etc. Do you really think an AR15 is going to take those out? Thank god the teabaggers are on their way out and are being marginalized for what they are; a bunch of factually devoid crazies that are completely out of touch and paranoid that the sky is actually falling.

OBXER

February 8, 2013 10:18 am

Good job Russ….when people start throwing out stereotypes and hate , it doesnt matter what side they are representing, they look like an idiot.

Russ Lay

February 8, 2013 9:34 am

Salvo: Not sure why you addressed me! I merely reported what occurred at the meeting. I teach government and have read all the debates about the Second Amendment. I think Heller vs D.C. settled the argument (legally, not in terms of debate) that SCOTUS thinks the Constitutional right to bear arms goes beyond the scope of a well-regulated militia and extends to self-protection. However, in typical SCOTUS fashion they left a lot of wiggle room for more cases to determine what government at all levels can do regarding types of weapons, registration, magazine capacity, use of clips, firing mechanisms that it will take many more cases to resolve. SCOTUS has ruled, in the 30′s I believe at the height of organized crime that taxes on the fully automatic weapons and sawed-off shotguns preferred by organized crime and bank robbers were “not protected” under the Second Amendment, so there is some precedent.

As to me, I have not made my views on gun ownership known in this forum and am not likely to at this point! This discussion is already heated enough!

roanokeislander

February 8, 2013 8:40 am

facts ?! we don’t need no stinkin facts. we got rush. sheesh. tinfoil to be sure.

Native daughter

February 8, 2013 1:09 am

Can’t grasp it also can’t spell it!! If you don’t like our “accents” freaking leave. I do believe we were here first. As for nuts, when did you escape? Go back to the farm with the rest of the sheep. P.S. Did you build your million dollar house on the ocean front? Now that is foolish. Have a blessed day. Don’t eat the fish, we talked them into the boat!

Native daughter

February 8, 2013 12:30 am

Ole Salt and Harry, Exactly and Thank You! The sheep want us to bury our heads in the sand. After all, most of them think God is a myth too. Can’t wait to see how that works for them. Either way I still pray for their souls. Why don’t some of you Obama nuts come out of the social service office and talk to some survivors of the holocaust( or that didn’t really happen either). Just like the ones living in N.C. but getting a free education in Va. using another address. Freeloading.

Lemonshirt

February 7, 2013 7:04 pm

Teaparty!? Is that thing still around?!

Just to set the New Orleans gun confiscation straight: The order to confiscat gun. ..and only guns in which the holder could not prove ownership…was invoked on the LOCAL level. Fed government was not involved. …and no, it didnt have anything to do with Obama b/c he wasnt in office then. More to the point, afterwards the NRA filed suit and the FEDERAL district court upheld that the confiscation was unconstitutional.

So quit believing every right-winged conspiracy theory that comes down the pipe.

obxwahoo

February 7, 2013 8:29 am

Hey Tea Partiers,

Yeah, if y’all weren’t crazy, I’d be happy to show up for a meeting, maybe even join the cause of reducing our tax burden. I just got done paying $25K in 2011 taxes, and now I’ve got to come up with $30K for 2012. I’ve definitely got a dog in this fight.

However, my first order would be to gut military spending on weapons we don’t need – how can anyone fight taxes and not fight spending 310 Million dollars per plane on the F-35? Can we find ways to cut spending to a level more in line with every other country in the world?

Next, we can solve all our budget problems by cutting our health care spending, but that means single payer system, like every other developed nation. Until y’all are willing to look at proven ways of cutting spending instead of just railing against “government”, then meeting with you would just be a waste of time.

Salvo duck hunter

February 7, 2013 7:04 am

Russ the 2nd amendment IMO had more to do about getting what the new goverment needed and didn’t have ,weapons, to fight a war. Not sure a long rifle would have been the preferred means of protecting ones home. I believe I would be better able to defend my neighbors and myself if I had some RPGs, 50 cal machine gun and some hand grenades.

Jerry Alexander

February 7, 2013 1:16 am

Texas County Sheriff says he won’t enforce Obama’s gun ban. He happily gets on the phone with the liberal media and explains he doesn’t believe it and his county people don’t either. Click the link below to hear his phone interview.

http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/02/4508-texas-sheriff-against-gun-ban/
Collin, Texas County Sheriff Won’t Enforce Gun Ban – Listen to His Phone Interview [CLICK TO READ]
http://www.mrconservative.com
In light of recent events I feel I need to make a public statement of my views on this subject. As the Sheriff of Collin County, Texas, I have for the past 28 years served to protect and keep safe all citizens of our county, recognizing the trust placed in me with this profoundly important responsib…
Like · · Share · 6,3202631,578 · 3 hours ago ·

Alex

February 6, 2013 7:03 pm

It doesn’t matter whether or not the Tea Party stayed on point with taxation; the Tea Baggee’s never missed an opportunity to disparage them on that – they will disparage them on any other point they try to make.

I ended my association with the Tea Party once certain members started to add “defense of Israel” as a point of the party…and that as a Christian, you should support Israel without question. Obviously, I had to leave on that point since Israel is the greatest instigator in the world today.

But I will never have a problem with the “taxed enough already” message of the party. If you DO have a problem with it, you must be a recipient of some type of governmental largesse – and your motivation is clear.

ekim

February 6, 2013 5:26 pm

To all you Tea party Haters why dont you show up at the next meeting, Show your true colors! Wahoo thats the best you can do.

Liberty > Liberal

February 6, 2013 4:58 pm

@KDHgal and obxwahoo,
You sound like statist crazies who want the government to do everything for you. Unfortunate for you, its impossible to argue against truth and fact. So you resort to calling people insane and blaming fox news for other peoples problems. Bottom line is all news agencies are simply entertainers. They are making money just like hollywood, entertaining people to get them to watch.

Jerry Alexander

February 6, 2013 4:09 pm

“If they change the Constitution,I will defend it” Well! Here is a little something “They” are doing now. The “IRS” is paying Tens of BILLIONS of TAX PAYER DOLLARS in Child Tax Credits to Illegal Aliens.At the same time! the US Postal Service will discontinue mail delivery on Sat.That`s only one thing “They” are doing.I can not understand how any America could defend “They”.People like Napolitano,Reid,Pelosi,Barry,Holder,Schumer,Axelrod,and the entire number of the Muslim Brotherhood.What “They” are they talking about? What they are they willing to defend?
Like I said! I have more questions after the meeting,many more!

Jerry Alexander

February 6, 2013 3:56 pm

I attended the Meeting,and I am not a member of any party Tea Party,or,otherwise.My question was not answered by Doug,but was answered during the meeting.
I saw the man with a pistol on his hip,and thought he was a cool civilian.After listening to him speak I ask if he was a Sheriff Deputy,he said no,and that was true but!he was/is a cop.It isn`t too difficult to spot one in a crowd.Why was he there? He was there to represent the views of the Sheriff,and not let the conversation get too one sided.That little move has been around for ever…nothing new!
I left the meeting with more questions than I arrived with.
Based on some of the post here,I can see America has a long way to go in order to educate the people about guns,and especially no guns.Just take a look at the countries where their guns were taken away;not good!
One can look at Australia for a current lesson on the matter.I sat next to an old man that was bragging that he has a list of phone numbers to call when ever he saw something that looked suspicious.It was obvious that he would not recognize something suspicious if it hit him in his face.

KDH Rezident Evil

February 6, 2013 2:32 pm

So help me understand this UN-backed government takeover theory of the right.

1) What is the purpose, first of all? Are we all going to be placed in slave labor camps subsisting on a diet of rice and beans cranking out widgets for Chinese billionaires? What does the nefarious government/UN want to accomplish in your minds exactly? You are right: I don’t “get it” and am hoping somebody can explain this.

2) Who do you expect is going to carry out the government’s occupation of its own country? I mean, granted you’d have some soldiers, federal agents, and others who might blindly follow orders, but how many would refuse to obey their marching orders if told to carry out such a drastic measure?

3) Carrying the worst case situation to its most ridiculous conclusion, and imagining a kind of Red Dawn scenario with Obamatroopers “taking over” America, just how long are a bunch of unorganized civilians going to stand up to the might of the US Military (one that is not constrained by the guidelines that currently make them “fight fair” and follow certain rules of engagement. I mean, if you’re going to toss out the Constitution, who gives a flip about Geneva Conventions?) Just remember when it happens, it was the right wing nutjobs who were AGAINST cutting defense spending. (I can hear the voices of regret now “We could have held Manteo if the Navy didn’t have all those Nimitz class aircraft carriers!”)

4) This is just food for thought, but keep in mind the Constitution protects us from unnecessary government interference in our lives. It has little influence over what private corporations are up to, and if you don’t think they are violating many of your rights on a daily basis, you aren’t paying attention.

Can't grasp it

February 6, 2013 2:16 pm

Lord, if I were King there would be a regular practice of Eugenics. Apparently by your own words, many of you are plain nuts and do not need to reproduce. Your intent appears to be to turn us into an Idiocracy based on delusion and paranoia. Many in this crowd wear poor English spoken with over exaggerated accents as merit badges. The more polarized an inflexible the position taken by these folks the prouder and more entitled they feel to foist their opinions on everyone. Were I the good Sheriff, I think I would have declined this invitation. Reminds me of what Ben Franklin said, “Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel”. I wonder what Paul Revere would have thought of this tea party.

Larry D

February 6, 2013 12:23 pm

Salvo duck hunter says:

Don’t think the founding fathers would have thought much of crazies getting hold of assault rifles and massacuring children, what happened to their unalienable rights? All the founding fathers had reference to were single shot black powder pistols. There is not that much difference between assault rifles and fully automatic guns. No one needs more than 5 rounds in a 12 gauge shotgun to protect their home. Band high capacity clips and institute stringent background checks now.
Thank goodness the tea badgers are seen as a fringe wacko group.

on February 5, 2013 @ 7:38 am
…actually at the time the most advanced weapons in the world at that time were carried by the colonists. They had rifled barrel long guns with full sights designed for pinpoint shot placement.
The british relied on a smoothbore rifle that was only effective when a squad of 25 men lined up and all shot covering a given area with nothing more than a bead sight for general aiming.
Had the roles been reversed it is very possible that the 13 colonies that rose up would of never achived much more than a footnot in the history of the british empire.

Sharon

February 6, 2013 12:00 pm

It’s sad that the Tea Party got away from their original message of tax reform and started accepting the gun nut crowd.

OleSalt

February 6, 2013 8:54 am

Sheriff Doughtie is correct. He is bound by law to uphold the Constitution. Executive orders are not something he is bound to uphold. You can what if all day but good old common sense trumps it at the end of every day.
The administration is Washington to avoid reality in the current events and the economy likes nothing less than to feed on paranoia.
Until it is stopped at the ballot box you can expect nothing more from the current administration. Thank you Sheriff Doughtie.

harry

February 6, 2013 7:16 am

To those of you who say I don’t NEED a semi-automatic rifle, or a 30 round magazine, I say I don’t NEED to read 6-8 newspapers a day, but I CHOOSE to do so, exercising my First Amendment rights in a manner which suits MY preferences. I also CHOOSE to exercise my Second Amendment rights as I see fit and based on what I determine MY needs are, not on how YOU think I should choose. YOU do not get to determine my Constitutional rights, nor do YOU get to determine what I need or don’t “need”.

100,000,000 gun owners will not be deprived of their Constitutional rights, as guaranteed by the Second Amendment, just because a bunch of self-important government types, conspiring with a complicit, radical media, think they know better than we do what is good and acceptable for us. We are not the subjects of an ever-expanding bureaucracy, we are United States citizens, and the government is only allowed to govern us WITH OUR CONSENT.

obxwahoo

February 6, 2013 7:11 am

Let’s see… ekim – loves CAPS, hates SPELLING… yep, he’s belongs in the Tea Party!

Agenda for next meeting: Which brand of tin foil makes the best anti-mind control hats?

Ridiculous that adults are carrying on about “taking away guns” when nothing of the sort has been discussed at any level of authority. Paranoia will destroy ya…

Time for the real adults to stand up and take back the conversation, and keep pressing to close the loopholes that allow the insane, criminals, and domestic abusers to buy guns. Wait… it all makes sense now… yes, you are all right Tea Partiers, the Government doesn’t want insane people to have guns… so yeah, that pretty much means all of you are going to get a visit from the jackbooted thugs.

KDHgal

February 6, 2013 1:00 am

QUIT WATCHING FOX NEWS or listening to the likes of Limbaugh! All the conspiracy theories, misinformation, outright lies and other hatred they spew, and those who blindly believe, is destroying the United States.

Duh?

February 5, 2013 10:15 pm

my guns are my guns.

Bob Samuels

February 5, 2013 9:15 pm

The government is taking our guns away; UN Agenda 21 is taking over the world; Obama is a socialist and his plan, backed by the leftist liberal media, is to make ‘merica a bunch of weak blah, blah, blah.. You better hunker down Tea Partiers, ’cause they’re all coming for you and your families. Spend your life savings on weapons, canned goods, survival kits. But, don’t forget the mortgage.
Do you realize how paranoid and out of touch you are? Instead of worrying about all of this hypothetical BS, how about volunteering around our community, furthering your education or just go surf! Lord knows, you just gotta chill!
By the way, after Hurricane Katrina, President George W Bush was in office. As I recall, Blackwater, was the group sent in to try to restore order. Obama’s new “goon squad”?

Alex

February 5, 2013 7:33 pm

Understand that all of the Tea Party bashers (aka ‘Tea Baggee’s) are against those who oppose taxation for one very good reason: they DEPEND on taxes for their sustenance. Regardless of how they may LIE and tell you that they are employed (highly paid, of course!) or are successful business people, oftentimes they are simply unemployed trolls on medication FRIGHTENED that if the Tea Party gets their way their life of leisure on the Gravy Train will end.

So don’t worry too much about the Tea Baggee’s crying and carrying on with their name-calling and ridiculing. (‘tin foil hat crowd’) they know that they will soon have to find some PRODUCTIVE way to provide FOR THEMSELVES…and that’s a big, scary proposition to these child-adults.

ekim

February 5, 2013 7:15 pm

To the TEA PARTY haters please put your $$$$ were your mouth is and ask for HIGHER TAXES, Show the world you mean it demand HIGHER TAXES!

Jeremy D. Adams

February 5, 2013 6:19 pm

We already have examples within the United States of gun confiscation. We already have examples within the United States of law and executive order violating the supreme law of the land.

We now have the NDAA 2013 which allows Americans to be detained indefinitely without trial, charge or any 4th, 5th or 6th amendment rights. Executive order combined with the Patriot Act allows the President to assassinate American citizens without trial or charge.

At what point do you stop and think: “Hey, I don’t care if you don’t think it will ever be used, but you don’t have that right no matter what.”

If you don’t think they won’t do it anyway, then why do they have the “laws” and Presidential directives to do it now? Why not just stop those laws now instead of saying “it won’t happen here anyway”, which is exactly what people said before it happened in every historical instance.

Better safe than sorry in defending the Constitution. It isn’t extreme to want to nullify illegal laws. (Laws are illegal as soon as they are made, not when the Supreme Court may or may not get around to declaring them so. Executive Orders have NO legal authority, but they are still carried out illegally.)

We don’t have control of our money (a private bank, the Federal Reserve, which is owned mostly by European bankers and the rest by their buddies in China and New York and NONE by the American People) and in 2008 alone they printed $16.1 TRILLION dollars and “loaned” it out for 0% interest to their buddies while the American people paid for it with inflation (and continue to pay for it with more and more inflation, every time you go to the grocery store and prices go up). If we give up guns capable of defending ourselves from a government that already breaks the supreme law of the land, then we won’t ever be able to fix that, and soon we will all be nothing but tenants on our own land vastly indebted to those bankers that own Federal Reserve Notes.

(See GAO Report on Senator Bernie Sanders’ website for breakdown of who got that $16.1 Trillion Dollars. I use the term “loan” loosely in the statement above since there is no actual audit of that money paid back and watching the quantity of FRN in every measurable way – M1-M3, we know that it isn’t getting paid back.)

It isn’t extreme to be careful. We have literally hundreds of thousands of examples where our government has acted outside of its scope and violated the rights of the people, why not just be careful and defend your rights now and prevent any desperate situation where we literally have to fight for them (like what happens daily around the world)? It is better to protect them now without violence then have to do so later when people get hurt.

gunconfiscater1

February 5, 2013 6:13 pm

I love the second Ammendment. I also love how people call Magazines, clips. I do believe the founders wanted the government to protect our liberties, not take them away. I also believe the founders were all for a revolution in the case the federal government started overstepping its boundaries. Just because over 51 percent of the people are brainwashed or refuse to take the time to learn what is going on doesnt make what the federal government is doing acceptable.

Millenial

February 5, 2013 4:55 pm

What these meetings need is a educational speaker of supreme court history and precedent. The regurgitated talking points continually come up from those who are not willing to sit down and understand the nature of the different precedents in order to form their own, genuine opinion.

The interpretation of the 2nd amendment depends on your point of view of the relationship between the operative and prefatory clauses of the amendment. It has been my experience that people who blast off a rehearsed talking point fed to them typically do not understand the fundamental mechanics behind their own arguments, and would rather demonize the opposing view point when really, they haven’t bothered to examine it.

So, before you open your tool box full of inflammatory monologues, consider some self-education form a source other than youtube, npr or talk radio. The Library of Congress is a good start:

http://loc.gov/law/help/second-amendment.php

Who knows, you might learn something.

chaser

February 5, 2013 4:06 pm

Climb in the bunker, the black helicopters are already on the way….

manteobxr

February 5, 2013 3:30 pm

Heck I’ll post it for you.;
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

manteobxr

February 5, 2013 3:28 pm

Much discussion here missing the point of the second amendment- it is to uphold the third amendment. For those that don’t know- you should look it up. The third amendment gives us the right to resist the government overstepping it’s powers.

Nickrite

February 5, 2013 1:35 pm

Gotta love all the Tea Party bashing from those who have never been to a meeting or even know some one who would claim to be a “tea partier”. Newsflash, your local Tea Party is actually a Republican supper club. For that reason I, as a conservative walked away from it. I stand by gun rights and our constitution which is NOT a “living” document.

Mr Nice Guy

February 5, 2013 12:50 pm

Gun rights today…Gun rights forever. We will never give up our right to own whatever gun we choose.

Linda

February 5, 2013 12:42 pm

Great job Doug, keep up the good work!

Jason Riggs

February 5, 2013 11:13 am

NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 8 – Waters were receding across this flood-beaten city today as police officers began confiscating weapons, including legally registered firearms, from civilians in preparation for a mass forced evacuation of the residents still living here.

For those of you think ‘this can never happen’. Well it has…

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/08/national/nationalspecial/08cnd-storm.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Jason Riggs

February 5, 2013 11:10 am

For those of you saying that we are concerned about things that can’t or won’t happen… The Dept of Homeland Security HAS been conducting ILLEGAL/UNCONSTITUTIONAL searches in Hyde Co. Hyde Co is our neighbor for those who don’t know.. So stop saying we are worried about things that can’t or won’t happen. You are the one how have mental issues. Not those who are concerned about keeping their rights.

Jason Riggs

February 5, 2013 11:03 am

Wow. I van’t believe so many of you are opposed to the constitution. Amazing!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QiBcC8_goVg

Jeff

February 5, 2013 9:46 am

I firmly believe Sheriff Doughtie will uphold the Constitution. The Tea Party folks have transitioned from standing for fiscal conservatism, something I fully support, to pushing the far right agenda, which is out of step with most moderate conservatives, myself included. The Tea Party antics turned off a large number of independents, which gave Obama the election, which brings us to our present predicament. Until my fellow Republicans stop focusing on the far right agenda, we will continue to fall under the rule of the liberal left.

Gene Hoglan

February 5, 2013 8:21 am

Hoo boy, Sheriff Doughtie, Frances D’Ambra, and the tea party. A real meeting of the minds right thar.

Former Dare Resident

February 5, 2013 8:02 am

William Jones hit the nail on the head! More American Citizens are realizing, every day, that the “tea party” is a useless no-good organization!

eggscelent

February 5, 2013 7:54 am

The proposed bill by Senator Fienstein bans transfers (this includes sales and inheritance)of over 120 specifically named firearms as well as any firearm having one or more of those “scary” features. This amounts to confiscation just with a short delay. Endgame is the same, only criminals and the gov’t will possess these weapons.

ekim

February 5, 2013 7:41 am

Flo & bill typical Librael Dems Obama voters! They go right into the name calling. The gun companys have been making millions since day one, ya’ll just dont like CAPITAILISM!!

Salvo duck hunter

February 5, 2013 7:38 am

Don’t think the founding fathers would have thought much of crazies getting hold of assault rifles and massacuring children, what happened to their unalienable rights? All the founding fathers had reference to were single shot black powder pistols. There is not that much difference between assault rifles and fully automatic guns. No one needs more than 5 rounds in a 12 gauge shotgun to protect their home. Band high capacity clips and institute stringent background checks now.
Thank goodness the tea badgers are seen as a fringe wacko group.

Mike Castano

February 5, 2013 7:20 am

It’s great that we can bring citizens together to talk about law enforcement issues as it pertains to our Constitution. It shows people are thinking and questioning. These types of meetings are banned in several places in this world. We may not be the perfect nation but I know of no other county or country I would rather live and raise my family in!

Bill

February 4, 2013 11:27 pm

FYI, “hyateria” is plural for mob hysteria.

Bill

February 4, 2013 11:23 pm

Nobody is going to take our guns away from us. Wake up folks and stop being pawns for the NRA and big gun manufacturers who control the NRA. Big gun makers are making a fortune off our hyateria.

Flo

February 4, 2013 10:59 pm

The teabaggers are an angry bunch. I think they are afraid of the background and mental health status checks.

PC

February 4, 2013 10:10 pm

Sounds like members of the tin foil hat crowd were present at the meeting.

KDH Rezident Evil

February 4, 2013 9:03 pm

We accept limitations on all our rights. You can’t threaten somebody and call it “free speech.” You can’t print liable and hide behind “freedom of the press.” You can’t marry underage girls under the pretenses of it being acceptable under “freedom of religion.”
Guns are no different.

KHer

February 4, 2013 8:48 pm

Sounds like the sheriff has a balanced approach to the issue of gun control. Well done.

Both sides of the issue have extremists who play on peoples’ fears.

Jon

February 4, 2013 7:50 pm

Have these audience members actually read the Constitution? Specifically Article VI, second paragraph?

Kinda makes Beaufort County’s resolution unconstitutional, doesn’t it? Because I fail to read in Article III, Section 1 where the Beaufort County commissioners are vested with the judicial powers of the United States.

Ordering sheriff’s deputies to “fight” federal law enforcement agents would clearly seem to be treason under Article III, Section 3.

Fortunately Sheriff Doughtie seems more well versed in constitutional law than these audience members.

comfortablybum

February 4, 2013 7:14 pm

czarina

February 4, 2013 6:57 pm

Sorry Doug — but tea Partiers do not rule Dare County. It is irresponsible to not require sense and sensibility when it comes to gun ownership. Plus it is also irresponsible of you not to emphasize that NO ONE is trying to take away ALL guns.

2nd amendment lover

February 4, 2013 6:52 pm

“broad interpretation of the second amendment”??? what is so hard about “shall not be infringed”?

William Jones

February 4, 2013 6:46 pm

Sounds to me like the Sheriff and former Chief D’Ambra were the only ones present with any common sense. First, the Tea Party loves to hype unconstitutional this and that, while failing to understand what the 2nd Amendment actually means. Hitler is not going to fall out of the sky and start confiscating guns from everyone.It is not remotely possible to do so. If you believe it, then you may as well join the Tea Party types with their make believe underground bunker mentality.

Jason Riggs

February 4, 2013 6:46 pm

“The sheriff reiterated his office would not contravene laws passed by Congress nor would the sheriff’s office prevent federal law enforcement agencies from exercising their authority in situations where their jurisdiction was clearly established.”… The issue was whether the sheriff would intervene if federal agencies were enforcing authority in situations were their jurisdiction was NOT clearly established. The topic of the DHS conducting unconstitutional searches in Hyde was brought up as an example. The sheriff clearly stated that if a federal agency was acting unconstitutionally inside of dare County that he would do nothing to stop them..

Jana Murray

February 4, 2013 6:34 pm

Former Manteo Police Chief Francis D’Ambra keeps resurfacing as an integral part of this discussion, D’Ambra believes the Constitution is a “Living, Breathing Document”. As one of those citizens who are concerned about the militarization of law enforcement manipulated by Federal government being replaced with private security firms, I would like to know that our Sheriff understands his Oath to uphold the Constitution, like so many do. Sheriff Mack has done a great job in clarifying the issue.

Join the discussion:

You must login to post a comment.

Not registered? Create an account.