Is CO Giving Secret Service The Power to Arrest Sheriffs?

Colorado sheriffs have gone on record against enforcement of the unconstitutional Colorado gun rights restrictions. Scuttlebutt is that noncompliant law enforcement officers are in the crosshairs of the governor. The rumor grew out of proposed SB 13-013, appointing certain federal agents as Colorado peace officers. To quote from the bill’s summary, “The bill gives a special agent, uniform division officer, physical security technician, physical security specialist, or special officer of the United States secret service limited peace officer authority while working in Colorado.” Should the Sheriffs be afraid? . . .

Under Colorado Statutes §16-3-110, federal officers who are licensed to kill authorized to use deadly force already have limited peace officer status in Colorado, entitling them to make misdemeanor and felony arrests for state law violations that they actually observe (they don’t need state peace officer status to make arrests for federal law violations, observed or not). SB 13-013 gives federal Secret Service Agents broadened powers to enforce state laws.

If passed, the Feds will have the additional power to make state law arrests based on observation, probable cause in an emergency, or when assisting Colorado cops by invitation or as part of a joint task force.

Sorting out the truth of the rumor first requires determining whether a sheriff’s willful non-enforcement would be a crime. Absent some statute or case that I don’t know about, I’m inclined to say no. If this proposal places anyone in the crosshairs, it would be Joe or Jane Citizen with a standard PMAG. But if that’s the case, why would Colorado enlist the Secret Service and not the ATF?

We’ll find out more about this bill in committee and floor debates.

76 Responses to Is CO Giving Secret Service The Power to Arrest Sheriffs?

  1. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Apparently, they are, under the direction of the Chocolate Sock Puppet-in-Chief. This is going to be an interesting showdown, and I don’t think Sheriff’s Department are going to take this sitting down.

    Some kind of smackdown is looming. I hope it’s the kind we want. There is NOTHING to keep Sheriffs from arresting SS (!) agents if they try it.

    • avatarpat says:

      And I would use force of arms to aid said Sheriff’s.

    • avatarJohn F says:

      I have brought this up before and I hope EVERY ONE OF YOU reads this book,,, it is happening NOW.

      http://www.zjstech.net/~ddixson/Unintended_Consequences.pdf

      • avatarBen says:

        +1 on this, I’ve read it already. Have to say, its scary how much this fictional world is resembling our real world more and more every day.

      • avatarHenry Bowman says:

        Great book, if I do say so myself. :-P

      • avatarPeterZ in West Tennessee says:

        Read it twice in a row. I downloaded the .pdf and ran it through a converter to put it in Kindle format. A Google search I did a few minutes ago indicates it can be found in e-book format free also.

      • avatarRick C says:

        ive been telling ppl i know to read it.its scary similar to whats going on RITE NOW!lil poop is hittin the fan already,the real crap storm is a comming though!!!btw i havent been here much but this is my first post thanks for having a great place for like minded ppl!

      • avatarFuque says:

        Yup, A great read…. Interesting that my local library has it.. Only one copy and you gotta be on top of it when it comes in because it never sits on the shelf longer then a day..

  2. avatarHarold says:

    Sheriffs are obligated to enforce state laws not federal laws. Marshalls enforce federal laws as I understand it. They may ask Sheriffs for assistance or any other local LEO. All this shows is the tyrannical nature of the gun-grabbers.

    • avatarBruce B. says:

      “Sheriffs are obligated to enforce state laws ”

      Ex-LEO here.

      Uh, no they’re not. Every arrest is based on officer’s discretion.

      Example – Speeding:
      No cop I’ve ever met will stop you for less than five over the limit. Most of the guys I knew wanted 10 over and above. And I knew more than one officer that flat refused to write ANY traffic tickets. Saw that as beneath them. (To speak of another officer as a traffic cop was a derisive term. That was someone who was uninterested in seeking more serious offenders.)

      Could they face departmental discipline? Perhaps. Sheriff is the ultimate law enforcement officer in the county. Pretty much have unlimited discretion.

      Additionally, how do you arrest one for a failure to perform? Statutes are typically drafted to penalize behavior, not inaction. I just realized there are exceptions to that blanket statement, i.e. failure to report child abuse, etc. But would think you would need very specific legislation, and it would be difficult to prove all the elements of the crime,

      • You haven’t been in Texas if you think no cop stops anyone going just 5 miles over the speed limit. They are more than happy to pull over any car going even 1 mile over the speed limit if that car does not have a texas liscence plate. I know, I have been living in Texas for over 13 years now.

      • avatarFuque says:

        Are you defining the term “Law enforcment” by Arrest?.. Tickets and warnings are used too.

  3. avatarUSMCVeteran says:

    “But if that’s the case, why would Colorado enlist the Secret Service and not the ATF?”, because given the police state we now live in “SS” is more Hitleresque than “ATF”.

    • The DHS (Department of Homeland Security) is probably the most Hitleresque govt. agency there is. And haven’t you noticed, ever since Bush created the DHS, every other Hitleresque govt. agency seems to get put under DHS. Even FEMA, which was created during the Carter administration, has been put under the DHS. I don’t think Carter was a very capable president, but I don’t think he invented FEMA for the globalists, but that’s who they are working for now.

  4. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Apparently, they are. It’ll be very interesting to see if he goes through with it. There is nothing to keep the Sheriffs from arresting SS agents if they try it.

    • avatarDJ says:

      “You’re under arrest!’ – Fed

      “No you’re under arrest!’ – Deputy

      “No you’re under arrest!’ – Fed

      and so on, and so on

      • This is why sheriffs across the nation have already said that trying to force them to enforce Obama’s unconstitutional gun laws will bring about civil war. What I can’t understand is why the sheeple and the ignorant are okay with sheriffs being arrested for upholding the constitution, but cry foul if any dares mention holding Obama accountable for treason.

  5. avatarPyratemime says:

    I am thinking that if state LEOs can’t enforce federal laws (a la AZ immigration) then feds shouldn’t be enforcing state law. There is a reason for federalism dividing power at different levels.

  6. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Apparently, they are. It’ll be very interesting to see if he goes through with it. There is nothing to keep the Sheriffs from arresting SS agents if they try it.

  7. avatarWilliam Burke says:

    Sic semper tyrannis!

  8. avatarMark says:

    The only thing I’m not sure of is what would trump an “elected” officer (Sheriff)? I don’t think the Govenor can do that? The Sheriff is suppsoed ot be the highest law enforcement officer in their jurisdiction. Short of martial law I just don’t see it. Things are getting more interesting by the day.

    • avatarLCB says:

      In Ohio…I “think” the county coroner can arrest/remove the sheriff on the county level…but that’s it. Of course, the State police can always be called in…

  9. avatarPyratemime says:

    If state LEOs can’t enforce federal law then federal LEOs shouldn’t be enforcing state laws. Federalism and all that.

  10. avatarAnmut says:

    We need to let the Sheriffs that are taking a stand out there know that we, the AI, are behind them in this.

  11. avatarLance says:

    Think cops would arrest the SS agents trying to destroy local PDs and Sheriffs offices.

  12. avatarRob.G says:

    The sky is angry and I feel there is a storm coming.
    I hope I’m wrong.

    • avatarRob says:

      I feel the same way, buddy.

      I would like nothing more than to wake up 5 or so years from now and say: “Wow, I was so paranoid back then! Remember how worried we all were about the direction things were taking in this nation! How wrong we all were! Let’s not get so worried from here on out!”

      If I can wake up in 5 or so years, and there aren’t hundreds of thousands of dead, dying, (Along with those wishing they were dead from being maimed in combat) young men and women (Yes. Women are probably going to be caught up in the coming $Hi†-storm as well, so be prepared to see young women — 18-25 years old — with their faces blown off in care facilities broadcasted coast-to-coast…) throughout this land because of another civil war, then I’ll gladly buy a $100 bottle of champaign, pop the cork, and drink until I pass out.

      Here’s to hoping that the sausage factory is clogged up enough to keep things from boiling over…

      • avatarRob.G says:

        Like you, I would truly love to be wrong about these things, but I have a bad feeling about this vision.
        It no longer appears to be about right and wrong. Logic and long established statutes and Constitutional laws are becoming little more than toilet paper in the hands of the elected few.
        I see deep lines being drawn in stone that cannot be erased.
        How did all this escalate so quickly?

  13. avatarMark N. says:

    I don’t think this has anything to do with the Sheriffs and they have nothing to fear. The Secret Service does not operate under the orders of the Governor of Colorado.

    • avatarPyratemime says:

      True they do not. However, if they just happen to be working in conjunction with a LEO joint task force assembled by a governor or are otherwise on assignment/loan and see something ITHO that could be a violation…

  14. avatarSkyler says:

    My guess is you’re misreading this. They won’t arrest sheriffs. This power will be used to go around the sheriffs and enforce the new law.

    • avatarAaronvan says:

      that’s what i thought why cause all that trouble when you could still get goal #1 accomplished?

    • avatar2nd Amendment Rules says:

      these new laws are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and the sheriff took an oath to uphold the Constituion!

      • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

        So did the governor and state legislators. Sad.

        • avatarGeorge Hilbert says:

          “So did the governor and state legislators. Sad.”

          All the more reason to hang them.

  15. avatarBach says:

    So, is Hickenlooper channeling the Anschluss from 1938? This looks like the first step in abdicating local governance to the Feds. What does the governance model of a federally administrated ‘state’ look like. Will the Obama administration supply them with their new state constitution all at once, or a piece at a time? When will Putin Obama be appointing County commissars commissioners.

  16. avatarPantera Vazquez says:

    Hmm something to think about here. most if not all of us are already aware that many Sheriffs across the nation have stated that if an AWB becomes law they will not enforce it. We already know that POTUS has done some pretty sneaky things as has his AG, particularly concerning firearms. Would it be too far fetched for the AG to offer the services of federal officers to come to the aid of governors concerned that their PDs would not abide by state law and/or federal law if it comes to pass? Just something to think about………….

  17. avatarflboots says:

    I think the same thing was tried in the Johnson Co. War.

  18. avatarNelson says:

    Hope y’all read Mack-Printz vs. US.

    Sheriff Richard Mack (Graham County, AZ) SUED the Clinton Admin over unfunded mandate in Brady Bill, not to mention over its general violation of the 2nd Amendment, but it was argued under the 10th Amendment. The SCOTUS decision REAFFIRMED the 10th Amendment/State’s Rights & their duty to interpose between the residents of respective states vs their would be Federal traitors. And, Scalia’s majority opinion clarified that the County Sheriff IS THE HIGHEST LawEnforcement Authority, PERIOD, as he/she is the highest delegated peace officer elected by the citizenry.

    The Sheriffs can arrest ANY Fed Gvt goonsquad in his/her county. Period.

    • avatarjimbthepilot says:

      This ^
      See this

    • avatarThe Original Brad says:

      Um no. You need to read that case again. Not read what you want from it. It states, in summary, the federal government could no more order state officials to administer federal law than state officials could order federal officials to administer state law. Scalia was simply making a point about LE with in a State. Soooooo, I am not sure where you got the idea that Sheriffs are the highest law in the land but if said Sheriff interferes with a Federal investigation, that’s called 18 USC 111. Prosecuted in Federal court.

      Look, no one wants that. Feds don’t want that. A blue on blue fire fight is not going to happen. Period. If it comes to that, we’ve entered a civil war, and we’re waaaaay beyond Feds vs. Locals.

      • avatarWA_2A says:

        And if we enter a civil war, the Sheriffs get OUR backup, but the Feds get the military.

        Damn.

        SHTF.

        • avatarAverage_Casey says:

          The military isn’t going to back the violation of U.S. Constitution and an all out civil war based upon a tyrannical state. Trust me, us Marines won’t do it and I know that a lot of the Army won’t either.

        • avatarJohn C says:

          They don’t have the military, period!

        • avatarmatt says:

          Average_Casey keep on telling yourself that but they’ve done so countless times in the past and continue to do so today with the extra-judicial executions of Americans such as Anwar Alaki and his son, both of which violate their constitutional rights to due process and cruel and unusual punishment.

      • avatartdiinva says:

        The active duty military will stand with those left standing. From a practical point of view the military leadership, no matter what their personal views on gun control are, know that the military will fracture if federal government tried to use them to impose their will. Our military culture considers national defense against foreign enemies as its first and really only duty. They would rather let the National Guard take on civil issues.

        The Guard is controlled by the Governors and in red states they would be called out defend against the central government in the scenario under consideration. Make no mistake, today’s NG is every bit as combat capable as the regular Army. It would be foolish for a purple state governor like Hickenlooper try to use the Guard against the people. The Colorado Guard is drawn from old Colorado. Even in deep blue states enough elements of Guard will not comply. So in the martial law scenario the regular military and blue state NG would sit on its hand while the red state NG would kick federal LEOs out of the state.

        This is no win scenario for everybody and the most likely military course of action would be the Joint Chiefs moving against the President like they did in Chile. For that reason no President would try to impose martial law unless there is an external threat to national security or continental wide natural disaster.

        • For that reason no President would try to impose martial law unless there is an external threat to national security or continental wide natural disaster.”

          Keep telling yourself that, but the central bankers have finally figured out that they can accomplish their NWO agenda a hell of a lot quicker if their puppet, err, I mean Obama, can do anything he wants without having to answer to anyone or being held accountable for anything. Thats why we see all of his unconstitutional executive orders.

          If they can give control of the whole country to just one puppet, err, I mean one president, then think of how much easier and quicker they will be able to have their NWO if their puppets, err, I mean presidents can’t be challenged or that their puppets, err, I mean presidents, don’t have to go through all the muckety muck of governmental procedure to get something they want done.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      Any they can deputize as they see fit.

  19. avatarThe Original Brad says:

    Short answer, no. There are a lot of gaps in Federal, State and Local LE. Most are there by design. However, some are there due to the fact that Federal Agents as we know them have relatively, not been around that long. Their authorities were written by DC bureaucrats, so to say they were I’ll thought out or half assed, is giving them a compliment. One forgets that in the beginning, FBI agents were even allowed to take their guns home with them at night. In VA, Feds are given full peace officer status. It seems in Co, they are not. So not all States are equal in this regard. The USSS has a pretty big stick when it comes to influence. They protect the Prez and other Heads of State. So they are obviously using that influence and trying to close the gaps in their authority to better serve their agents as they work financial crimes, on task force details, protection. We can talk about the over reach of Feds into state LE later, but as far as Feds arresting locals for not following State laws goes, this is a non-starter. A rumor started by rumor mangers who are pushing an agenda.

  20. avatarMark says:

    I hate to be this guy, but
    if the Sheriff departments and the Feds start a shooting at each other, it’s actually a “Win” for us.

    • avatarWA_2A says:

      Explain how civil war is a “win” for ANYBODY.

      • avatarRob.G says:

        It’s not.

      • avatarSilver says:

        Saying a war isn’t a “win” is short sighted. True, it sucks and is painful for those involved, to put it mildly, but sometimes the end goal is worth it. Was the Revolutionary War not a “win” for certain people?

        If a civil war ends up restoring this country to a free nation, it most certainly would be worth it.

  21. avatarPlumbump says:

    I recall an oath I took once, its language was pretty damn clear.

    • avatarRob.G says:

      At least you read it before you swore an oath to protect it.
      That is good, but you seem to be an exception.

  22. avatarDave S says:

    The feds need locals to do leg work and provide local knowledge. While they can play with the small town cops and so forth, messing with the Chief LEO of a county would be tricky. The local support of the public means a lot. Sheriff Joe comes to mind

  23. avatar2nd Amendment Rules says:

    Since a Federal police force is NOT authorized in the US Constitution the Secret Service has no authority in states or counties! If these gestapo agents show up the sheriff should issue a SHOOT TO KILL order to protect the US Constitution and the county citizens.

    • avatartdiinva says:

      It is not prohibited either. The US Marshal Service is the oldest professional law enforcement agency in the country. Their original purpose was to enforce orders of the court and transport prisoners across state lines. They were also the chief law enforcement officer in US territories. The legends are true, in the old west you did not want to screw with a US Marshal.

  24. avatarBilly Colman says:

    The gun issue aside, there goes any comfortable room to operate that the newly legal cannabis growers, distributors and users ever thought they had. Unintended consequences.

  25. avatarBob Damon says:

    I know many would like to find some sinister purpose with this but, many states have similar laws. All this does is provide a legal framework for allowing Secret Service agents to work with local LE. It’s all about liability and defense attorneys using any gap in law to nullify an arrest.
    If the Colorado Gov wanted to arrest Sheriffs, he would use he State Police.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      As far as I know, the Sheriffs never said they would actively resist State police, local police, or others. They simple said that they would not enforce the new unconstitutional gun laws. If they stick to that, there will probably be no direct conflict (I think someone else said that). If the Sheriffs honor their duty to uphold the constitution against all enemies, then it could get ugly.

  26. avatarCeefour says:

    What did you think the kings troops were going to be used for? All the ammo? The fancy troop carriers..etc etc. This guy and his fellow travelers are chomping at the bit to go after all of us….he just needs an excuse…the dance is about to start and yall better have good dancing shoes……

  27. avatarMJ says:

    Unsure of all the legalities involved, I would hope the longstanding Constitution would trump any law to the contrary. Unfortunately the admin. has shown it’s disdain for the Constitution and any law it doesn’t agree with, it has set precedence in selective enforcement. I too believe a storm is brewing… It seems there’s a lot of dust gettin kicked up but not many tracks made, not yet anyway.

    • avatarmatt says:

      People need to stop bringing up the constitution like it means something, it hasnt in god knows how long. For instance where in 2A does it say a felon cant own a firearm or that firearms require serial numbers or that we aren’t allowed to own post ’86 machine guns.

  28. avatarJD says:

    temporarily Deputize an army of us to help you repulse the SS in CO…

    to see that actually happening in the USA would be a dark harbinger for very bad things to come….from last bastion of freedom to candy ass cardboard cutout plastic empty shell of it’s former self: our influence in the world would drop to zero as they laughed at and mocked us, ala Kim Jong Un. “Look what you do to your own people.”

  29. avatarRydak says:

    This has been so totally debunked over and over. They are not doing that and the sheriff’s are all for this law.

  30. avatarlarry craig says:

    I will also take up arms against any nazi like tactics I see. I’m also a Marine and need to say “wake up” now not in five years. Our Gov. Needs to get a clue or move to the people’s republic of California.

  31. avatarJohn Adams says:

    Colorado is just the testing ground. Remember, Oblahblah want to have a “civilian force” that is on par with the military. Just like his commie comrads in 3 world countries where the military are the police and vice-versa. Another problem is that the commies want to “fundamentally transform” America into a socialist-communist hybrid state; such as, the Peoples Republic of Commiefornia

  32. avatarLenny Elbon says:

    Deputize me. I don’t need a badge, just draw one on my palm with a sharpie!

    Have guns, will travel!

  33. avatarTom says:

    by law the federal government may not have a criminal code. By law any federal “law enforcement officers” are only authorized to operate in jurisdictions within any county, without the sheriffs authorization. These are the laws we have. but the fed doesnt care about limited jurisdiction, or authorization. local authorities out number fed fools 1000 to 1. and that doesnt count the civilian militia, as stated in USC title 10 sect 311.
    the laws show both the governor and the federal government are engaged in treason and terrorism.
    Let the chips and the criminals fall.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.