The recent tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut has broken the hearts of millions of Americans and surfaced the need and demand to address violent criminal activity more aggressively — from a federal level, all the way to local enforcement that maintains a safe environment, not only for our children, but all citizens. As Cobb’s sheriff, that has and always will be my personal and professional goal. I take my oath as a Georgia Constitutional Officer seriously and will absolutely uphold the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Georgia, as well enforce state laws that serve and protect our community. In the past few weeks there has been an enormous amount of dialogue about guns, ammunition and legal possession of firearms. My strong support for the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution began well before my 37-year career with the Cobb County Sheriff’s Office. The principles contained in this amendment support the other rights and liberties guaranteed by our Constitution. Recently there has been a great deal of confusion and misinformation about the purpose of the Second Amendment. It is not, as some say, about hunting, target practice or even the right to own a gun collection. It is a reflection of our Founding Fathers very real understanding that no rights would be safe without the citizens having the means to defend and protect those rights. These same individuals had just fought a war against a repressive government to achieve their freedom. They knew very well what was required to maintain that freedom. Over the years, I have had discussions with individuals, liberal and some not so liberal, who were against the right to bear arms for a number of reasons. The argument most often repeated is the belief that to be against violence, you must oppose gun ownership. My response is simple. Guns are not the problem. The real problem facing society is the erosion of family and moral structure that in turn leads to increased criminal activity — with or without guns. Until we face the real problems plaguing our society and quit seeking the quick and often political fix that shadows the real issues, problems will continue to increase. In our American government, Congress and state legislatures make laws and courts interpret those laws and determine whether they pass constitutional muster. Although the president has the authority to issue Executive Orders, that authority is limited. Our Constitution delegates three branches that must balance to maintain the freedom and quality of our life — Executive, Legislative and Judicial. It is profoundly disappointing that many prominent leaders in our country have chosen to capitalize on the horrendous murder of innocent children to advance their political agenda of infringing on the right of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. Clearly this rush to implement new gun control regulations has been undertaken as a matter of political expediency. It is still too early to tell whether the recent gun control measures proposed by the president will be passed by Congress or what impact his executive orders may have on our citizens. The previous Assault Weapons Ban was part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The ban did little, if anything, to curb violent crime and made meaningless distinctions between banned and non-banned firearms. Since the ban expired in 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for a personal right to keep and bear arms. This 2008 case — District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 — provides guidance and an interpretation of the U.S. Constitution that was not available in 1994 when the ban was passed. I believe this decision must be carefully considered before Congress or any other legislative body attempts to limit any rights of law abiding citizens to purchase and possess firearms. I firmly believe that at this critical point in our history, each of us must stand up and speak up by contacting our elected officials, including the president, to encourage them to act decisively to uphold the rights guaranteed all Americans by our Constitution. For my part, I intend to fully exercise the power and authority vested in me by my oath of office as Sheriff of Cobb County. It is my firm commitment to immediately challenge and seek injunctive relief from any statute or executive action which violates the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the citizens of Cobb County.
Neil Warren is sheriff of Cobb County.
When I served, my oath was first to the Constitution, and only after that to follow the orders of the president. In the UCMJ, it makes clear that only lawful orders may be obeyed, and that is the duty of any junior officer or NCO to refuse to obey any unlawful, unConstitutional order. Gun confiscation is and will forever be, illegal and unlawful, and every person in law enforcement and the military is sworn to ignore any such unlawful order.
Sorry, but the militia is not an organizaion with uniforms and membershiop cards. That is the military.
The militia will be there when it is needed.
Either you completely missed Madison's point in No. 46, or you failed to read the preceding No.45, or you are intentionally misrepresenting the position Madison is taking in No.46.
Madison's entire point is that those afraid that the federal government might one day usurp the powers of the state governments and began to oppress the people, should be reassured that the several state governments and the people thereof would never be stupid enough to stand by and patiently watch while the feds accrued that power over time. (Unfortunately, we have been.)
Also, the entire context of section of No. 46 from which you cherry picked one phrase, is that the state governments and their militia, the people themselves, would be able to repel any armed hostility by any federal army. I'm not sure I share Madison's confidence here, but this proves exactly the opposite of what you tried to state. Madison believed the militia, an armed populace, was the best guarantee of the people's liberties. Shortly prior to the phrase you lifted from No. 46, Madison said this.
"Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were...." and he proceeds in the statement which you so clearly lifted out of context, as I hope other readers here will agree.
Stupid is as stupid does, Marie!
They want a FEDERAL executive order enforced but hypocritally want Sheriff Warren to ignore the half million illegal invasion in Georgia. Why ignore illegals? Because its a FEDERAL law and the State and County have no jurisdiction. At least there is a law passed by Congress as directed by our Constitution, unlike an Executive Order which is unconstitutional in its basis because it bypassed Congress and infringes on our 2nd Amendment.
The 2nd Amendment was adopted to protect citizens from a tyrannical government. We need sophisticated weaponry now more than ever because this administration has overreached with Obamacare and now limits on citizens' defense.
Amnesty next - family unification will seal the deal for socialism until the money runs out in a generation.
When you have Fake News Foley and Nation of Islam, open borders Pellegrino against you, you have the right enemies.
BTW- Foley has a second home in Montana. It is important to him that everyone knows.
I know becauase he felt compelled to put it in his little read blog several times. Maybe he has looked up what a rifle is by now too. Who knows. Who cares.
According to Rich Pellegrino, "what isn't love is hate". I think these clown hate you sheriff.
I wonder if your attitude will change if your deputies ever have to face bank robbers armed with assault weapons and large capacity magazines.
PS: His deputies and other officers have guns too. In the event of a home robbery, I am guessing you wouldn't.