19 votes

William Grigg: Do NOT Trust Sheriffs to Protect Your Guns. They Are Hypocrites, Bought and Paid For.

I always enjoy Grigg's incisive commentary.

This time is no different. He kills it: http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w305.html

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

People from Tennessee

Should really take a look at their county Sheriffs. The TSA moved into Tennessee, on the highways and roads until it looks like the first state in the police state. What is your local Sheriff doing about the Feds on the roads? Nothing?

If that's true, would you trust a Sheriff who wants to protect your 2nd amendment rights from Federal usurpation, when the same Sheriff doesn't feel any obligation to protect any other of your rights against Federal usurpation?

Trust Is Earned

When the time comes all Sheriffs' actions will demonstrate where they truly stand. No need to trust mere words anyway. Remain vigilant and skeptical.

If you read the article, I

If you read the article, I think the point is that the time has already come - again and again and again.

And so we already know where they stand.

Grigg's poor reasoning

Mr. Grigg builds his argument on faulty premises.

First, we can look at the faulty argument that accepting money predicated on an allocation system one doesn't believe best as tantamount to, I guess he's saying, hypocritical at best and treason at worst. Such an argument would mean that any unhypocritical, untreasonous citizen should never call 911 if they live in a jurisdiction that receives federal funds. Nor should such parents send their children to public schools, or drive on public roads -- or allow themselves to use any unconstitutional government benefit. It's silly. It defines the hypocrite or untrustworthy as anyone who isn't living in a van down by the river. (Even that guy is probably gets some positive extranality from the federal tax dollar at work.)

I thought Ron Paul dealt with this faulty logic quite well in an interview last year. When asked why he adds requests for federal projects in his district into the omnibus bill despite that he always votes against the bill in final form, he said that the current system takes federal tax dollars from folks in his district with the understanding that some of it will come back to them. This is the system, and, although he doesn't like it, he is representing his constituents as best he can within this flawed system. To do otherwise would cheat his district out of part of their federal tax dollars. It's the old you play the hand you're dealt -- even while working to change the rules of the game.

Mr. Grigg, apparently, does not respect Paul's philosophy here. Nor does he seem to comprehend the real world of real people in the fray, struggling for the more just outcome. I see he writes a blog and does a radio program. In other words, he just says stuff; he doesn't contend with the messy middle where real people, like Dr. Paul, attempt to navigate the less-than-ideal and drive toward something better.

Second, his assumption that taking something from the "enemy" -- equates to being in the enemy's pocket. You can bet that folks who think this way do so only because they ARE THIS WAY. Mr. Grigg may not be able to stand up to any man who shoves a nickle in his hand...um, but the majority of people can and do every day.

"If you take the nickel, you take the noose," Mr. Grigg writes. (This is, in fact, the fulcrum on which his argument swings.) I'm not sure in what sort of world such a statement would be true, but I'm quite sure it isn't mine. So Rep. Paul, who has taken many nickles from the Federal Government, has taken the noose? So has every citizen who has taken social security, sent their child to public school, used the services of anyone who has taken a federal college grant or loan -- or done so themselves -- lived in a home mortgaged through Freddy or Fanny. The list goes on. His argument is absurd.

Third, he forgets that sheriffs, by and large, are elected throughout this country. He wants to poke at sheriffs because they aren't his readers/listeners while ignoring the people who elect them.

"There isn’t a single county sheriff’s office in the country that hasn’t compromised itself by accepting federal funds, and collaborating in unconstitutional federal enforcement operations. They’ve long since lost their innocence, but are pretending that they’ve just noticed that fact."

Let's see how that would play if he put in the correct noun.

There isn’t a single voter in the country who hasn’t compromised himself by refusing to vote for sheriffs who make it a campaign issue to refuse federal funds. Voters collaborate in unconstitutional federal enforcement operations by not making this a top priority in the voting booth. Citizens/voters have long since lost their innocence, but are pretending that they’ve just noticed that fact.

Ah, but who among his blog and radio audience would wish to be condemned with the same brush he reserves for sheriffs? Mr. Grigg knows his audience would rather point elsewhere, and so he gives them a finger. It's them. It's always some other them. Comfy.

Grigg's reasoning is crystal clear

Perhaps you have forgotten the past, but Will Griggs has not. He can't. He sat in with me on a group of liberty lovers, to try to find some kind of justice for my friends, Bear and Marcela. (google "He's a Constitutionalist" if you don't know the story.) There is to be no justice for that unprovoked assault. That is Will's home state, the same state where Ruby Ridge went down. That incident included the cold blooded murder of Vicki Weaver as she held her baby in her arms. The ATF thug who murdered her was not disciplined, he was rewarded and sent to Waco.
Those of us who live in the shadow of Ruby Ridge walk with those ghosts. They are wise advisers in these times, and Will gives them a voice. You would do well to listen.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Grigg reasoning so sloppy

Oops, double post

Voted -1Did anyone read the

Voted -1

Did anyone read the article? William has issue with one Sheriff because he was a part of a SWAT raid for drugs, thus he places guilt to all Sheriffs because they are coming out to say they'll protect 2nd Amendment rights? This recent showing from Sheriffs is about the 2nd Amendment. Not the war on drugs. Definitely not Williams best work if Im reading it right.

Did you read the article?

Obviously not.


The article is surprisingly

The article is surprisingly chalk full of logical fallacies. I read all of it and I wish others would too. It is important to communicate with local sherrifs. Whats with this "talk to no one" because no one is to be trusted attitude among many liberty outlets?

You still haven't responded

to any content from the article.

Excellent, but bums me out.

I was hoping Kieran Donohue was sincere, but Will has a much better pulse on local politics than I. Vince, I guess you were right.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Our sheriff is signing a letter

One to go with the resolution I brought before our county commission that they both(county commission-sheriff) will up hold our 2nd amendment and TN constitution Art.1 section 26 against anyone trying to infringe in anyway on these rights. And yes I don`t believe that what our sheriff says in that letter will make any difference when the SHTF,but I will have it in writing and at some point when we hold him accountable that could be very valuable!


Fishy, I was hoping you would see

this article by Grigg because I was wondering what you would think. Let's hope that Donohue is sincere about the 2nd amendment issue, even though he might be somewhat ignorant.

Grigg is...

...dead-nuts on in his overall assessment.

Indeed. They say that "the

Indeed. They say that "the beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names."

Grigg strips away all euphemism and lays bare the truth. We are all the wiser for it.

Sounds like

our governor Rick Perry.....

"If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."
Samuel Adams

Ricky Perry = Ricky Bobby.

Ricky Perry = Ricky Bobby



for no more lip service. Show me.



One up cuz the Sheriff sticky

One up cuz the Sheriff sticky got a lot of people excited, and this is a worthwhile alternative perspective.

Must read, IMO.