Virginia Sheriff Renews Promise to Deputize Citizens When New Gun Control Laws are Enacted [VIDEO]

Sheriff Scott Jenkins

Courtesy Jeff Hulbert and YouTube

By Jeff Hulbert

Virginia Sheriff Scott Jenkins, who has gained national prominence for his plan to shield his citizens from Democrats’ gun control schemes, says more of his fellow sheriffs are now on board with his idea.

Jenkins serves in Culpeper County, a rural enclave in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains just 75 miles to the southwest of the nation’s capital. He is entering his eighth year as its chief law enforcement officer there.

In recent months, his willingness to take visible Second Amendment stands on behalf of the 47,000 Culpeper residents has won him accolades from gun rights groups across the country.

Most notable is his declaration that he is willing to deputize Culpeper County firearms owners to shield them from new firearms restrictions, penalties or confiscations.

In Richmond, where Democrats bent on drastic gun control have taken up a slew of infringement bills, Sheriff Jenkins politely waited his turn in the citizen testimony lines at the first set of hearings for his chance to criticize the schemes as empty politics.

Jenkins leaned in as he scolded the Democrat lawmakers for their plans to allow localities to ban firearms carry in parks, government buildings and at special events, comments that triggered jeers from the red-shirted Moms Demand Action attendees in the gallery.

The last thing we need are more gun-free zones. You didn’t get a mandate when you were elected in November. Listen to those who are operating in the realm [of constitutional laws] and not to the voices of those who are shoveling money into this state.

The Sheriff says the Bloomberg-funded attacks on his defense of Second Amendment rights only strengthens his resolve.

 

Sheriff Jenkins says that as the Second Amendment sanctuary movement swept the Old Dominion more and more of his fellow sheriffs have reached out to him to say they are looking at a deputization program as a constitutional response to unconstitutional laws.

And Jenkins says he will not knuckle under on this issue to statehouse Democrats if push comes to shove.

 

Sheriff Jenkins’ comments came after the Democrat-controlled Senate Judiciary Committee voted out the first group of gun control proposals to the House floor.

Virginia Sheriffs gun control

Culpeper County Sheriff Scott Jenkins (r), Grayson County Sheriff Richard Vaughan (c), and an unidentified Grayson County depulty (r) (Image courtesy VCDL)

There to witness the hearings and to pack the hallways at the hearing were more than a thousand gun rights supporters—many wearing NRA shirts given out earlier in the day.

Virginia gun control hearings NRA

Courtesy Jeff Hulbert

A significant number of the 2A crowd streaming into Richmond today are expected back for what promises to be a massive rally set for January 20th on the grounds of the State Capitol. Virginia officials are bracing for throngs of gun rights supporters that could number anywhere from 10-25,000 people.

Sheriff (Jeff Hulbert for TTAG)

Many attendees, including militia participants who have pledged to travel to Virginia from across the country, will be openly armed (firearms are only prohibited inside the capitol and legislative buildings) as they demonstrate for their rights in the face of the most drastic gun law proposals ever seen in the Old Dominion.

 

Jeff Hulbert is the founder of Patriot Picket

comments

  1. avatar cgray says:

    Listen, fat…

    1. avatar Boogaloo says:

      Don’t be a jerk.

      1. avatar cgray says:

        Mocking the Soviet Democrats.

        1. avatar Hans says:

          You need to work on your mocking skills.

  2. avatar Erik in AZ says:

    There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.

    Virginia Lefties are pushing gun bans not to save lives but to disarm and control the public. Even the red flag laws they spin as suicide prevention is mere confiscation. If the individual is such a threat to him or herself, why simply take their guns, but leave them their pills, booze, cars, rope, belts, shoelaces, razors, knives, etc? And why do they not even OFFER COUNSELING to this person who is such a threat that it is necessary to deprive them of their right to bear arms, defend themselves and be secure in their home with their property, without even committing a crime? They want to deprive citizens of due process merely to disarm citizens, and establish control over those they see as serfs.

    1. avatar gene says:

      Round 2 will be starting with all the VOTING laws

      1. avatar Erik in AZ says:

        Yup. They are gonna make sure it is one party rule for eternity. No voter ID, automatically register illegals as they get licenses, no excuse needed for absentee ballots, same day registration, felons voting from the Penn, The dead voting in triplicate, gerrymandering, you name it.

        1. avatar Southern Cross says:

          The Democrats are usually busy on voting day. Vote early and vote often.

        2. avatar Greem Mtn. Boy says:

          Of course they are busy, they have to make the rounds to rouse the dead to get the vote out.

        3. avatar George says:

          Governor Blackface is already trying to have the number of voters DOUBLED for signing a recall petition. The Communist Party is in charge in VA.

  3. avatar lefty says:

    ITS ALREADY HERE IN NEW YORK STATE WITH CUOMO/SCHUMER/BLOOMBERG/CLINTONS.TIME TO IMPEACH/DISBAR/DEPORT ALL OF THEM.
    I’VE GOTTA GET OUT OF THIS STATE.

    1. avatar Boogaloo says:

      Please check your keyboard. Your caps lock key seems to be stuck in the engaged position.

      1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

        Clearly you’re not fluent in Screamo.

      2. avatar MADDMAXX says:

        That’s just the way New Yorkers talk..

        1. avatar SAFEupstateFML says:

          Hey……. Ah who am I kidding too much whiskey and I am probably worse.

        2. avatar Mercury says:

          I even read the last line as “ahgoddagidouddadistate.”

      3. avatar Just Sayin says:

        And that’s not the “engaged” position.
        It’s the “enraged” position.

    2. avatar Hans says:

      LEFTY, THE FIRST THING IS TO CHANGE YOUR USERS NAME. :<))

  4. avatar Steve says:

    Without enforcement there are no broken laws, look at dope, it’s illegal on a federal level in some states are selling the hell out of it and if the street cops don’t care about me, I don’t care what they do either. We all get along, cops are underpaid and undermanned, don’t care unless they’re made to

  5. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

    Political posturing. Any attempt at that and the National Guard would round up the renegade sheriffs and imprison them. The Stalinist’s rule now and will crush all Opposition even if they have to with helicopter gun ships.

    1. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      You’d be more convincing if your grammar and spelling were actually correct. I’m sure there are ESL classes somewhere in the Great Russkie North.

      1. avatar Ганнибал и слоны (комнаты шлюха) says:

        The това́рищ is not even русский .The това́рищ is even more американский than me; and I was even born in a communist country. Most of us in exile from communist oppression share nothing with this тролль.

        1. avatar У меня есть вопрос says:

          Спасибо Ганнибал

        2. avatar Dan says:

          Cyka blyat.

      2. avatar Mike says:

        Grammer nazi, really. Elimination of constitution rights. And your major concern is if someones spelling and grammar is perfect. You are a sad, sad human being.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Grammer nazi, really.”

          Words have meaning, especially the arrangement of them. Without proper grammar, the following sentence is non-sensical:
          “Brad had had, where James had had had; had had had had a better effect on the readers.”

    2. avatar smitty says:

      Vlad you are such a freakin troll.

      1. avatar Greem Mtn. Boy says:

        Guy’s got to make a living between taking naps in his coffin in his mom’s basements,he trools.

      2. avatar Ганнибал и слоны (комнаты шлюха) says:

        да, as I said, a тролль

    3. avatar possum and the"Coons of Doom" says:

      I believe your right Vlad.

      1. avatar Renault says:

        That’s because you are stupid.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          He’s just a possum, cut him some slack. You think you could do so well without opposable thumbs?

          Whether or not the National Guard actually will start rounding people up, Stalin style (I lean toward not), I do believe that the Democratic Party apparatchiks would love to have them do it.

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I’m pretty sure the Nat’l Guard would not do that, but I would bet money they would not do it twice. Watching your friends die all around you makes you question your priorities, and you would discover there was no reason to do it again. Particularly if the survivors discover that several of them had “accidents” after returning from the first party, and won’t ever be back.

    4. avatar Bill says:

      Since you’re obviously not aware of it National Guard troops can be federalized with a presidential order. If a governor in a state start seriously stepping out of line the feds will take over command of the Guard.

      1. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        No your not aware they were all Federalized years ago so Big Brother would not have to fear any State resistance or uprising.

        The United States National Guard is part of the reserve components of the United States Armed Forces. It is a reserve military force composed of National Guard military members or units of each state and the territories of Guam, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, for a total of 54 separate organizations. All members of the National Guard of the United States are also members of the militia of the United States as defined by 10 U.S.C. § 246. National Guard units are under the dual control of the state and the federal government.

        1. avatar Boogaloo says:

          “You’re” not “your”, you idiot.

        2. avatar Mike says:

          Hey boogaloo, you clearly understood his meaning. If your major concern is to use spelling to degrade others, you don’t belong here.

    5. avatar Diksum says:

      Any attempt by the National Guard to begin to arrest sheriffs would be countered by Pres. Trump nationalizing the Guard and ordering them to stand down.

      1. avatar The Crimson Pirate says:

        Or by citizens “decommissioning” national guard members on the spot in defense of their constitution following elected officials.

        1. avatar Ing says:

          We can de-elect politicians and all manner of commie/fascist enablers in the same way, too.

          I hope to hell they never light that match, because the conflagration is going to burn right out of control. It won’t be good for anybody.

      2. avatar Hans says:

        Diksum, how correctoe you are.

        “The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 forbids U.S. troops from being deployed on American soil for law enforcement. The one exception is provided by the Insurrection Act of 1807, which lets the president use the military only for the purpose of putting down rebellions or enforcing constitutional rights if state authorities fail to do so. “

      3. avatar LarryinTX says:

        President Hillary would do no such thing. We’d better plan to take care of ourselves, not count on Presidents.

      4. avatar joe says:

        I say bring on the guard…..The VA governor forgets the reason for the 2nd amendment: it’s not for personal protection and it’s not for hunting rather, it’s in the event our own government becomes “tyrannical” and turns against its own citizens in which case we defend against government overreach……. We are fast approaching that point……

    6. avatar Fury says:

      “Any attempt at that and the National Guard would round up the renegade sheriffs and imprison them. ”

      Speculation on your part from start to finish. If he has the legal authority to deputize citizens, he will in all likelihood do so.

      1. avatar Huntmaster says:

        You ever in the military. I was. I doubt that will happen that way. Some would. Some wouldn’t. You will have a civil war. Once it starts, anything is possible. And remember. The military is conservative. And they will play for keeps.

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          I suspect if this were tried, the Nat’l Guard would show up and promptly request that the Sheriff deputize them, and then stand ready to defend him.

        2. avatar joe says:

          I was in the military….and I play for keeps too…keeping my constitutional rights intact.

          The founding fathers gave us the 2nd amendment to protect ourselves in the event our own government becomes tyrannical. Looks like the VA governor is going to prove the founding fathers right…….

    7. avatar bastiches says:

      * honk, Honk *

    8. avatar Daniel Vahey says:

      And if it comes to that Trump can step in and take control of the National Guard as he has the authority to do so. The only question is whether or not he would.

  6. avatar Resist Democrats 247 says:

    Why do liberals just assume the National Guard will obey their orders? I bet the majority refuse to go along and the rest will simply endanger their own lives. Democrats have no problems with abortion (killing babies) and they could give two shits about killing any of you.

    1. avatar possum and the"Coons of Doom" says:

      Why do,,,,,,. would you say the National Guard is made up of good soldiers? Good soldiers follow orders

      1. avatar Mad Max says:

        Because the NG would be enforcing the law against thenselves and their families, they will be ignoring those orders.

        1. avatar BillybobCA says:

          Nations Guard/ State Police simply follow orders
          Just look at what happened after Katrina

          National Guard willing and knowingly confiscated lawfully owned weapons from people in their homes.

          They entered homes without warrants to search for and take weapons.

          They entered homes without warrants, detained owners in flex cuffs while they “encouraged them”to surrender all weapons.

          You’re on your own.

        2. avatar Cale1532 says:

          Quick story I was in Kuwait door and Sandy Hook there was Pa national guard there. I live just north of Pittsburgh I was in the reserves one of them said I would have no problem kicking in doors and taking guns and then a couple more jumped in and said me either. I told them which one of you mf’s want shot first! They stopped laughing and left!

      2. avatar GomeznSA says:

        possum – good soldiers follow Lawful Orders – if you had ever served in any capacity you would know that.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “…good soldiers follow Lawful Orders.”

          That is the fantasy. The military do not process every order through a legal matrix, and determine for themselves (each member), what is lawful, and what is not. The presumption is that every order is lawful, unless and until, it is so patently obvious to be illegal (“It’s Wednesday, assemble the platoon, and shoot every fifth individual.”)

        2. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Once the first guy drops with a hole between his eyes, the rest will recall their oath really quick.

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Once the first guy drops with a hole between his eyes, the rest will recall their oath really quick.”

          You underestimate the opposition. They are masters at using imagery. Instead of “the first guy”, they will ensure the first casualty is female.

        4. avatar MADDMAXX says:

          they will ensure the first casualty is female……………… And black, gotta make it “REAL”

        5. avatar joe says:

          To be a legal order, all of the following must be true:

          1) The order must be clear and understood (No wiggle room in this one)

          2) The order must pertain to morale and welfare (lot of wiggle room in this one to say it’s not a legal order)

          3) It must be a legal order (more wiggle room here)

          Example: a superior orders troops not to return fire if fired upon regardless of consequences: this is an illegal order because it fails on 2 and 3, above. An order to stand there and accept incoming fire and be killed does not pertain to morale and welfare and it’s also an illegal order.

          Example: a VA governor order to confiscate weapons is also illegal based on at least #3.

          I think this is a fail if the VA governor tries to use the guard to go door to door. And if they do and guardsmen are killed I think it falls under the protection of “self defense”…..

      3. avatar Huntmaster says:

        Good soldiers follow legal orders.

    2. avatar Mad Max says:

      I believe you are correct about the NG and, further, gun owners outnumber military and law enforcement personnel combined by vast amounts at both the State and Federal level.

      I would suspect that a substantial portion of the military and law enforcement will jump to the gun owners side should a revolution erupt.

      Also, the military personnel will bring their military equipment with them. The gun owners side will be at least five times the size of government forces and almost as well equipped.

      1. avatar vlad tepes says:

        Oh brother you guys are so far out I wonder if you are serious. Now visualize a bunch of old white guys with beer bellies up against young brainwashed storm troopers full of piss and vinegar and eager for the kill. One jolly green giant electric gattling gun would fill every inch the size of a football field with enough holes to make Swiss cheese out of the old farts who can barely walk with the aid of a cane.

        Old white guys look out for no.1 and they know when its futile to resist. They get their jollies out of huffing and puffing but that is about it.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          You’re letting your inner nazi out, vlad. You really are one sick puppy.

        2. avatar Renault says:

          Sounds like Vlads projecting again.

        3. avatar Cale1532 says:

          How about you man the Gatling gun I’ll play the old fart! I like them odds!

        4. avatar Huntmaster says:

          Troll

        5. avatar Daniel Vahey says:

          You suck Vlad. FYI care to guess how many US citizens are former local, state and federal law enforcement and I would dare to guess that all of them are current gun owners. Now we get to the former military folks from all branches. ever rank from e-1 to Admirals and 4-star generals that have served in every conflict fought in our lifetime. This includes every SOCOM operator and combat infantry soldier. So you can put that idea of what you believe every white guy in this country looks like and their capabilities are. This is typical ignorance.

        6. avatar joe says:

          A lot of those fat white geezers have FAR, FAR more range time and experience with guns than the weekend warriors will ever have……. Also, the military are trained not to kill civilians and in a 100% civilian environment it’s hard to tell who the enemy is. The armed civilians however, have no such problem spotting guardsmen in an all civilian environment….

      2. avatar Sam I Am says:

        “Also, the military personnel will bring their military equipment with them.”

        What/which military equipment would that be?

        Stateside, “the military” have no equipment on their persons, and would be prevented from drawing stores and vehicles; bases would be on lockdown. The deployed military would not be individually abandoning units, and finding ways to fund their travel back to the US, definitely unable to bring their weapons and equipment with them.

        1. avatar jwm says:

          Sam. If the military is on lockdown then they and their gear will not be available for use against citizens.

        2. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam. If the military is on lockdown then they and their gear will not be available for use against citizens.”

          While useful, such condition does not support the oft floated idea that somehow we will see fully armed and supplied US military fleeing their posts with all their weapons, leveling the field of combat, running to the aid of civilian patriots engaging in insurrection, .

          Management of expectations is necessary and critical to understanding what a third civil war might actually look like.

        3. avatar More dentures on other planets says:

          When was the second civil war? (I know you wanted me to ask)

        4. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “When was the second civil war?I know you wanted me to ask)”

          Actually, thought it common knowledge.

          What we call “The Revolution” was not a matter of American military fighting a foreign enemy/army. We were colonists in North America; British subjects. The revolution was not the entirety of the colonists facing off against British regulars. It was a revolution, a conflict between people of the same nationality (British), and the revolutionists were not the majority. The Revolution was a civil war (#1).

          The war of secession was also a war between people of the same nation; a civil war (#2).

          Yet another war between people of this nation would be a third civil war.

        5. avatar jwm says:

          Sam. Dig into a little history. I served when Nixon was being hounded out of office. It was a very tense and unstable time. We would be put on alert and then stand down sometimes daily or even more. Rumors were floating about that Nixon was going to use the forces to stay in office. He was very popular in the military.

          We talked it out amongst ourselves. None of us wanted to raise our weapons against our own people, our own families. The consensus was we would not follow those orders.

          We are not machines. We have minds of our own. And before anybody jumps in with isolated cases of the military being used to subdue civil unrest. Yes, it has happened. But that’s not what we’re talking about here. A nation wide civil war is a whole lot different from a riot in on city.

        6. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “The consensus was we would not follow those orders.”

          The instance at hand is not whether US military would refuse to follow orders to put down insurrection, but the unsupportable idea that the US military will/would flee, fully armed and equipped, into the populace, and that such weaponry and supplies would be put to use prosecuting a revolution.

        7. avatar More dentures on other planets says:

          Thank you, Sam. I always thought of it as a British civil war.

        8. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “I always thought of it as a British civil war.”

          It was that.

          It was also the first civil war fought inside the boundaries of the colonies that became America the nation (well, except for that little excursion into Quebec). While the original colonies were certainly British, the general nomenclature for the people of those colonies was “American”. The entities were British colonies, but American colonists.

        9. avatar jwm says:

          Why is the idea unsupportable, sam? History is full of instances were soldiers have taken up arms alongside their fellow citizens against an unpopular .gov. Why would the US be any different?

        10. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Why would the US be any different?”

          1. Access to weapons at stateside bases is tightly controlled; combat units do now walk around their compounds in full battle rattle

          2. Deployed units in full combat gear are not going to be able to defect with all that ruck, and return to the US

          The issue is whether military personnel will defect “and bring their weapons with them”, not whether military personnel will defect and, with their privately owned equipment, join insurrectionists.

          Counting on our military to revolt, engage in on-base/post combat to acquire weapons, then mounting up and dispersing into the population to bring a measure of equality of force is not realistic.

          If the order goes out to put down a revolution, there may be turmoil, but not outright revolt. If “the shooting starts”, those who would not support such measure will likely be arrested on the spot. Those who are off base when “the shooting starts” will not be able to access weaponry located on post.

        11. avatar Renault says:

          Sam I don’t think anyone would/could be “arrested on the spot”, in such a scenario. The US like most western militaries don’t have MPs/Commissars patrolling in each military unit looking for insubordination. In fact the MPs themselves also may not support and be willing to defect in such a scenario. MPs are also a very small force compared to combat units, and also think of logistics. A combat force relies on roughly 3x the manpower of logistical support to keep it combat effective. I think online, the common arguments made about the allegiance of the US military, are made based on a lot of misunderstandings about history. Remember the Vermacht, Red Army, PLA, ect… had internal party enforcers within their ranks to ensure obedience and compliance with orders was met. They had full authority to execute traitors on the spot. Nothing like that exists in modern western militaries. I know what jwm is talking about when it comes to wholesale unit defection to a hypothetical rebel army. I have been there in the room with soldiers and commanders discussing possible future civil war. And this was not that long ago. This was during the Obama years.

        12. avatar Sam I Am says:

          It is actually quite simple…order that anyone hesitating to follow orders is to be detained and held for the MPs. Superior rank can detain an inferior rank, legally. It is also quite simple to put the post/base on lockdown, preventing those refusing orders from leaving, and joining the resistance.

          The issue is not, however, how many would refuse orders. The issue is the statement that the military will, in large numbers, refuse orders and join the resistance fully armed and equipped. Even if those refusing orders were allowed to peacefully leave the installation, and go to homes, they will not leave fully armed and equipped.

        13. avatar Renault says:

          I think that depends on how/when it goes down. Take for instance in VA, now, if the governor goes full Stalin, I wouldn’t be at all surprised the NG commanding general outright rebels or orders the NG to stand down. He in turn could be replaced by a more loyal one, but that event alone would cause a fair amount of disruption in the ranks. While Trump is in office, I’d expect at that point he’d likely step in. Now, in a hypothetical future where the DNC controls all three branches and tries nationwide gun confiscation, I think no matter what the military does they will have a crisis in their ranks. You are correct in that scenario that wholesale equipped units would not suddenly become rebel units overnight. It certainly doesn’t work that way. But you would have a large amount of defections, and morale would be low. This wouldn’t be the effective fighting force that the US is used to having in war. US military for over a century has been used to a force that has high morale, well supplied, well supported, well paid force. And added benefit of not having a violent home front. Wars are fought in a faraway place against people they don’t know. Even in Vietnam US soldier morale was much higher then let’s say French army in WW2 or even WW1. A military lead gun confiscation here would lead to not only many deaths, but divisions and deaths in soldiers personal circles. Most American soldiers these days, come from conservative areas, particularly the south. Their family members will likely not be on their side. That is not something American forces are familiar with. Then remember how logistics effect such wars. The military will have to recruit new soldiers for a war that will be more unpopular then either Iraq or Vietnam. Those new soldiers that do join will be less experienced then the defectors and veterans they’d face in the field. The military would be experiencing a brain drain. They also certainly wouldn’t dare try a draft. That would only worsen a bad situation.

        14. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Overall, I cannot disagree with your assessment. Having no opinion on whether any member of the full-time or part-time military will/will not defect when charged with enforcing civilian law, I leave that to others.

          Regarding your analysis, I have great difficulty reading and following the run-on paragraph style of narrative that is so popular now. One of the essential benefits of separating paragraphs with a beginning indent, or blank line feed, is the grouping of allied thoughts. The run-on style allows, even facilitates, thought-lines folding back on themselves at separate lines of text. Admittedly, I generally disregard such packed text, and move on to other comments.

          In the instance, it is important to understand that my original question/comment was restricted to the expectation that some number of members of the military would defect, and bring weapons. Such thought has been presented numerous times, over numerous musings about the next revolution. My only point of comment is that such expectations are romantic at best, with likelihood being vanishingly small. That’s it; manage expectations rationally.

        15. avatar Renault says:

          You’re right, I could’ve separated paragraphs better. Sadly grammar and English are not my strong points, something I could get into another long discussion on.

        16. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sadly grammar and English are not my strong points,…”

          I understand that in informal settings like TTAG, some laxity in grammar, even spelling are to be expected. The wording of your analysis was just fine, it was the structure of your narrative that was unsettling.

          If you have interest in understanding more about packaging your thoughts (paragraphs), contact me at [email protected]. A coupla quick ideas we can exchange. If you rather not, no feelings hurt.

          Cheers

        17. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Sam, that continuing discussion relates to soldiers who are sent to confiscate guns or whatever, and would be sent *with* their normal equipment. In the Branch Davidian government sponsored massacre of women and children, the FBI requested that the tanks they requisitioned from Ft Hood come complete with their military operators, and ammunition for both the main gun (!!!!!) and the coax .50 cal. Under direct orders from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, he surrendered the tanks under protest, and STILL refused to send his soldiers or *any* ammunition, which is why the killers had to burn the innocent to death. With a less heroic General in charge, the tanks might well have arrived under the control of enlisted soldiers with perhaps a Lt or 2. In which case I would call it a tossup whether they killed the Branch Davidians or the FBI. Plus, each tank would be on their own, they may have killed each other.

        18. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “Sam, that continuing discussion relates to soldiers who are sent to confiscate guns or whatever, and would be sent *with* their normal equipment.”

          Agree. However, a defection would happen only once, and with a small number of soldiers. After that, selection of the fire teams would be more discrete as to loyalties. There will not be large units defecting with full equipment.

      3. avatar Andre Stephenson says:

        MadMax: You are crazy and brain-washed by the NRA and other gun-rights advocates. Neither the state of Virginia nor the Virginia National Guard are coming to take weapons away from gun owners! Only those few citizens flagged under the red-flag law, if it passes. They’ve already withdrawn from the Senate a bill to confiscate your semi-automatic weapons. And they are NOT going to confiscate your handguns. That’s what you GUN NUTS don’t understand!! They don’t have a bill to confiscate your handguns! So settle down!!

        1. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Hey, Andre, that is what they are CLAIMING they are going to do, do you have some secret source which knows they don’t really mean it?

    3. avatar Chief Censor says:

      I wonder why politicians in Virginia think they can…

      Hmm…

      1. avatar Kahlil says:

        Great, a news report from Russia Today (RT).

      2. avatar Vlad Tepes says:

        This confirms everything I have been saying and it can and would happen again.

    4. avatar Prndll says:

      There is a weird assumption that criminals will obey gun laws.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        While that is fun, there is also an unrealistic belief that the law abiding will obey gun laws, instead of simply ignoring them.

    5. avatar M1Lou says:

      Helmer was a Lieutenant Colonel in the National Guard, just look at his pre-filed bill and his campaign he ran. It’s unconstitutional as hell what he would subject the people of Virginia to. Helmer is an oath breaker.

  7. avatar Dennis says:

    A damn shame we have to have our law enforcement protect us from our “representatives”!

    1. avatar joe says:

      The founding fathers envisioned that the day would come when our own government turns against us (they called it a government turning “tyrannical”) and that’s why they gave us the 2nd amendment. Many people refuse to believe this but it’s right there for anyone to see.
      So I say “bring it”!

  8. avatar Rob in utah says:

    That’s a good sherrif

  9. avatar BootsOnGround says:

    Thank you, Sheriff Jenkins. Thank you so very much, Sir, for standing with law abiding gun holders and our Constitution to protect our right to keep and bear arms. The Democratic gun-grabbers all they care about is controlling citizens so that they can take away our freedoms and right to be free that we as a nation have fought hard to keep. Many of our great patriots have even shed their blood for this very freedom.

    I hold an out-of-state concealed carry permit from the state of Virginia and support deputizing citizens to protect our constitutional rights under the 2nd Amendment to keep and bear arms. Deputizing is constitutional and legal; gun confiscation is unconstitutional and illegal; yet, Democratic liberals without shame and justification are making laws that are both unconstitutional and illegal. And we will stand strong with you, Sheriff Jenkins, because the truth is on our side by the blessings of almighty God.

  10. avatar Marc says:

    I will be there on the 20th!

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      Turns out I am not going to make it. The bride’s cancer Doc doesn’t want her travelling while beginning a new regimen of horrendously expensive pills, and I’m not going to leave her. But my thoughts, and hers, will be with you.

  11. avatar Slim says:

    He’s certainly in fighting trim.

    1. avatar Renault says:

      I bet he’s a good hundred pounds thinner then you are.

  12. avatar Vlad's a fag says:

    Verbal diarrhea in every comment

  13. avatar NORDNEG says:

    If we don’t win Virginia, we lose everything … money talks & Bullshit walks,,, get ready Patriots & keep your powder dry,

  14. avatar Jay in Florida says:

    What dimension does this Vlad thing live in.
    Over a 100,000 new deputies in the state alone. Don’t believe for a minute anyone would obey an unconstitutional law. If they did. They would be amongst the 1st to die. When push comes to shove.
    The state would only need a few hundred of people like me. No family over 65 and not a heck of a lot to loose in reality. My life?? Maybe, but so what. It would be for the best reasons there is.
    Freedom.
    Sign me up.

    1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

      “What dimension does this Vlad thing live in.”
      Answer.
      The glory hole dimension. He comes out periodically to share is wisdom with others.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        Pffffttttttttttttt … bwa ha ha ha ha ha!

        That there was funny Chris T in KY!!!

      2. avatar Huntmaster says:

        He lives in his mothers basement and he’s only here for attention. Either that or he just gets paid to generate traffic on TTAG.

  15. avatar Peegeetwo says:

    Nobody wants to hear the truth.

    1. avatar Renault says:

      That you’ve finally decided to come out of the closet?

    2. avatar jwm says:

      Maybe it’s the messenger, not the message. Even a valid message is lost when it is delivered by an obnoxious ass.

      1. avatar Geoff "Anti-Vaxers need to get cancer and die" PR says:

        And an “obnoxious ass” who never talks guns in The Truth About Guns… 🙂

  16. avatar Timothy Toroian says:

    That will be most difficult for the governor to deal with. HeHe!

  17. avatar KRP says:

    It will not be long now before the actual shooting starts when a Barney Fief type will enforce these unconstitutional enactments with a no know 3 am SWAT wack!! The person having no idea what the heck is going on and being in a sleep haze will grab a gun and then die when those that choose to obey the tyrants shoot first!! There will always be those who will do anything to gain power and this country is no exception. We will see anti-gun sheriffs put in place by the overner who will gladly attack the people. Therefore this will come down to a shooting war!!

    1. avatar Diksum says:

      In Virginia, sheriffs are elected by the people.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        And just about everywhere else, it’s sorta like the definition of a Sheriff.

  18. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

    I just wish this Sherriff would deputize me. I even married a girl from Culpepper, and would be willing to spend 8 hours a month in VA if only Florida would recognize it. I spent nearly a quarter of my life in or about northern VA.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      Florida doesn’t recognize Virginia LE credentials?

      If you decided to move to Va from Fl, could you work at a Va department, based on your Fl LE credentials?

      1. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

        I’m not LE. I worked for USPHS at NIH (in fact my office was right next to NIMH as in “The Rats of NNIMH,” that will separate the men from the millennials), the Veterans Administration and other institutions in or about DC for the Federal Government and other private institutions. I am sure that FL would recognize VA LE status, in fact that is what I was hoping for. FL and VA recognize each other’s CCW, after a few minor technical extra steps.

        1. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

          Sorry to stutter, “Rats of NIMH”
          😉

        2. avatar joe says:

          When the civil war starts LE credentials will not be a requirement to defend against door to door illegal seizures…..

          Here’s the way it will work:

          Guardsman: knock, knock: excuse me sir, we see on registration forms that you own an AR-15?

          Homeowner: I sold it a year ago.

          Guardsman: well, we’ll have to come in and verify that

          Homeowner: not without a search warrant you won’t

          Guardsman: excuse me sir, please step aside

          Homeowner: bang, bang, bang, bang, bang

    2. avatar Diksum says:

      Culpeper

  19. avatar possum and the"Coons of Doom" says:

    The federal government doesn’t want our gunms,. It’s space invaders controlling the states governments and people’s minds. It’s a plan to take our gunms and take over because there are two many humans on earth and not enough cows. Space Invaders like beef, that’s why they came here in the first place, ivaded paradise and turned a couple of people’s heads, so they got throwed out of paradise and started eating meat. Now the space invaders knew humans would eventually eat up all the mastodons and start raising cows. But humans were smarter then the space invaders thought and got medicine. Now humans live longer then they were supposed to and they re eating up more cows then the space invaders had planned on.

    1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

      “But humans were smarter then the space invaders thought and got medicine.”

      Things began to decline when stone-age – agriculture-age folks tried to store grains in water and discovered beer.

      Then they said, “Rather than wander to find grains and build a new village each year, let’s grow it here so we can get drunk faster than if we moved and had to build again…”

      1. avatar Budvar (Artesian water, Moravian barley, and Saaz hops) says:

        Waiting for Vlad to inform us that no industrialized country allows people to brew their own alcohol; only government authorized entities are authorized to do that in his world.

        1. avatar possum and the"Coons of Doom" says:

          He’d be kinda right in away, you can make it but you can’t sell it without govs permission.

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Geoff— Wait, wait, WHAT? Things began to decline when somebody discovered beer? WTF planet are YOU from?

  20. avatar LUVITORLEEVIT says:

    MY CAPS LOCK KEY IS NOT STUCK. I TURNED IT ON. WHO THE FUCK IS THIS IGNORANT PIECE OF SHIT VLAD TEPES, AND HOW DO YOU PEOPLE TOLERATE HIS STUPID BULLSHIT?

    1. avatar Sam I Am says:

      “HOW DO YOU PEOPLE TOLERATE HIS STUPID BULLSHIT?”

      The same way we tolerate you?

      As with VT, your insistence on being obnoxious with the capslock provides a nice clue to instantly delete your submissions.

      We are egalitarian about such things.

    2. avatar LarryinTX says:

      He’s in hiding, his real name is “Vlad Wants To Be Impaled!” if that helps.

  21. avatar Alan says:

    It appears that this sheriff has his head screwed on correctly, which is a lot more than can be said for some other elected officials.

    1. avatar Hannibal and the Elephants says:

      Beats my former next county over Sheriff (former as in removed by the Governor) Israel.
      I like Culpeper’s Sheriff better.

  22. avatar R. Gallagher says:

    At least there are some men in power in this country who don’t care about the Democratic bullshit. I wish I lived in his county. Good man with the right idea…

  23. avatar Howard Seaton says:

    Sheriff, as a former Virginian, I am with you 100%

  24. avatar Frank says:

    should have already been deputized way back when the democommies got elected

  25. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    Sheriff Scott Jenkins has “crossed the Rubicon”. He’s not just talking to reporters now. There is no turning back now. If anti constitutional laws are pasted. Law-abiding citizens should be debitize in his County. Or he will be voted out of office for refusing to do so when he said publicly he would.

  26. avatar Steve says:

    Been reading these columns for awhile.
    Some great comments & others so so.
    Never thought I would live to see the day (45 Year’s later) that my deceased father & uncle’s talked about …
    Out of control government, socialism & such here in this country.
    Would add a few comments of what one of my uncle’s thought we should do to half the politicians & lawyers but then the Nazi Commies would be breaking down my door & trying to do a sweeping anti gun search.
    Wow … would they be in for a surprise.
    My family has been in this country for around 400 years & a King James Bible & black powder rifle bought & kept this country free.
    My grandfather died at Bunker Hill battle under George Washington.
    His cousin (Patrick Henry) gave the speech …
    “Liberty or Death”
    Unfortunately now it’s going to take some AR 15 s, lots of 30 round clips & 10 s of thousands of 223 or 5.56 ammo to keep this country alive.
    So … read your bible,
    … buy more guns & ammo
    … build your food pantry
    VOTE … VOTE … VOTE
    GOD BLESS THE ORIGINAL U.S.A.

  27. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    If this guy came out to support drug legalization he would be on the cover of Reason Magazine.
    But because it’s about guns they refuse to talk about it.

Leave a Reply to R. Gallagher Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email