Bio not provided
You have over looked some important issues, though in the general, I understand, and perhaps agree with many of your assertions.
Merely taking federal money, DOES NOT mean unfettered compliance with all federal mandates. Simply look at the results of the states refusing to participate in the No Child Left Behind, or the 55 mph federal mandates. Both of these refusals resulted in the "threat" of reduced/elimination of federal funds in these areas, both resulted in the states gaining control in these areas without losing federal funds. So the same process can be had for any law enforcement funds, if that is desired.
Second, are these Sheriff departments, when enforcing drug laws, enforcing federal laws, or state laws? If a Sheriff is operating with a search warrant from his county judge, then the beef is with the judge, if it is illegal or inappropriate. Many of these are, like the Sheriff, an elected position, thus directly responsible to the People. If a Sheriff is merely working as an agent of the federal agency, then he/she, has stepped outside of their mandate and authority of the People, and again, is DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE to the people, via the election process.
I'm sorry, I am not going to allow the blurring of the fact that unlike the ATF, FBI, State Police, city police, DEA, CIA, the Sheriff is DIRECTLY ACCOUNTABLE to the People of his/her county. If the Sheriff is conducting him/herself in a manner which is contrary to the Constitution (both state and federal), then it is up to the People of that county to correct him/her, and to remove them from office if correction is not possible.
Also, we must understand, that many of these Sheriffs are new to the concept of Constitutional authorities and powers. They need both education and support to be furthered down this path. They also need correction when they stray. These are the duties of the citizen owners of the county.
Finally, it is ill advised to blur the subjects of gun control and drug laws. The purpose is obviously an attempt to gain justification and approval for lessening restrictions on various outlawed drugs, at the expense of preserving the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
We know there are infringements upon many Rights and Liberties. However, trying to mesh drugs and firearms in this battle against the Second Amendment, serves no benefit to either subject. If the People of a state can not, or will not change the state laws regarding illegal drugs, then it is disingenuous to assert that the Sheriff needs to step out and support that which the People of his county does not support......Note how this all bears down upon the shoulders of the People? As it should in a Constitutional Republic. ;)
2 years ago on Kentucky legislature will consider bill that would...