How do you know if you have a constitutional sheriff, like my two heroes, Sheriff Richard Mack, and Sheriff Dave Clarke? Ask questions. They will reveal where they stand if you talk to them for very long.

Will they confiscate your guns if the idiots in D.C. pass a federal statute to do so? If they answer, "yes", or "I will follow the federal law", you have your answer. Will they go door to door to help force the unvaccinated to take the jab? If they answer, "If it is federally mandated I will." You do not have a constitutional sheriff.

Don't let them kid you that they have no choice. They are the top law enforcement agent in their county. Unless your county has a coroner. They can tell the FBI to take a hike if they don't want them there. They have a choice. They are just choosing against the Constitution they took an oath to defend and protect. Remember the Hillary-loving sheriff in Florida who told his deputies to stand down during the school shooting?

You can remind them of their oath to the Constitution. You can remind them that the Constitution is the law of the land. There is no method as far as I know for amending the first ten amendments to the Constitution. Those are set in stone. Yet, as far as I can tell, this fake socialist administration as well as most since the time of Kennedy, have sought to violate all except the third amendment. But, that is probably coming as The Powers That Be want to eliminate the ownership of all private property.

Our sheriffs need to fully understand the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights.

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." How many of the first ten amendments are we seeing shredded today?

There isn't one part of the first amendment that the government hasn't violated. Especially under this fake administration.

The closing of churches; the silencing of the people's right to speak freely; the banning of any journalist not in lockstep with the Deep State; the right of people to gather together for any reason; and just try to approach any of your representatives to discuss an issue.

The second amendment states: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

How many ways has the government tried to water down this amendment? What are they afraid of? It isn't criminals or they'd stop letting them back out on the streets early. And close the damn border!

The fourth amendment states: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

Do I even need to bring up civilian forfeiture? That will be a subject for another article. But, how many parts of this amendment have been watered down to make it more convenient for law enforcement and the courts?

Does anyone think going door to door and forcing people to take a shot they don't want isn't a violation of the fourth amendment? Not that the Marxist/Socialist/Communist fake administration cares about violating any laws. Politicians, bureaucrats, and especially judges would have you believe that too much freedom will result in chaos. Therefore, we should gladly give up some of our RIGHTS for the good of the community. In other words, people acting in the name of government, say we need more laws, even if we have to give up some rights in the process.

They believe the more laws we have, the more control, thus a better society. As with the majority of socialistic ideas, this sounds good on paper. But, no matter how clever they make it sound, whenever you give up a right, you lose a free choice.

As William Pitt of the British House of Commons once proclaimed, "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."

The general misconception is that any statute passed by legislators bearing the appearance of law constitutes the law of the land. The U.S. Constitution is the law of the land, and any statute, to be valid, must be in agreement. It is impossible for a law, which violates the Constitution to be valid.

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is, in reality, no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it." Citizen's Rulebook, pg 4.

The law of the land has already been decided by past Supreme Court rulings:

"No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." 16 Am Jur 2d, Sec 177 late 2s, Sec 256

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137,174,176,(1803)

"Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton vs. Shelby County 118 US 425 p. 442

All of this should make it pretty clear what the law of the land is and anyone who takes an oath to defend and protect the Constitution from all enemies, both foreign and domestic, and violates that oath is guilty of treason. We need to make sure our politicians, but especially our sheriffs understand and practice this.

The sheriff works for We the People. Therefore, sheriffs should never be appointed but only elected by the people. Of all of the various levels of law enforcement we have in this country, sheriffs are the only ones elected by the people.

So, I would say, if any of your freedoms are important to you, it will be of paramount importance to determine whether your sheriff is constitutional or not. Find out where he or she stands on issues that are important to you. If they are more concerned with following the agenda of Washington D.C. than they are in upholding the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I'd say it's time to vote them out of the office or recall them. Replace them with a constitutional sheriff and give that person your full support. It is no exaggeration to say your life might depend on it.

"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." Thomas Jefferson