PDA

View Full Version : The US Constitution does not give the power to arrest? Only local elected Sheriff?




free1
10-12-2010, 06:29 PM
The way it should work is that if there's an injured party, the feds report it to the local Sheriff (the highest law officer in a county) and the Sheriff makes the arrest.

The US Constitution doesn't grant arrest powers, and doesn't need to because we the people delegated that power to our local elected Sheriff.

So is this another usurpation or power by the feds? Why isn't anyone talking about this? Are there any candidates out there that understand this and want to reverse any legislation that purports to use this power?

Here's a good reason why we didn't grant that power to a distant government:
"a president who claims the omnipotent power to ignore the Bill of Rights and an all-powerful military that claims the power to arrest, jail, and punish any American labeled a “terrorist,” including newspaper editors, government critics, and anti-war dissidents, without following the procedures set forth in the Bill of Rights. "
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0606a.asp

nate895
10-12-2010, 06:53 PM
I think the "necessary and proper clause" covers arrest in pursuit of its other powers. The question is, what crimes would the Federal government be able to arrest people for under its enumerated powers.

Baptist
10-12-2010, 06:57 PM
The way it should work is that if there's an injured party, the feds report it to the local Sheriff (the highest law officer in a county) and the Sheriff makes the arrest.

The US Constitution doesn't grant arrest powers, and doesn't need to because we the people delegated that power to our local elected Sheriff.

So is this another usurpation or power by the feds? Why isn't anyone talking about this? Are there any candidates out there that understand this and want to reverse any legislation that purports to use this power?

Here's a good reason why we didn't grant that power to a distant government:
"a president who claims the omnipotent power to ignore the Bill of Rights and an all-powerful military that claims the power to arrest, jail, and punish any American labeled a “terrorist,” including newspaper editors, government critics, and anti-war dissidents, without following the procedures set forth in the Bill of Rights. "
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0606a.asp

Pretty much. Read the Kentucky/Virginia Resolutions of 1798. Jefferson and Madison said that the Feds could not prosecute crimes, minus the few mentioned in the constitution (punishment for counterfeiting coin & securities, punishment for conspiracies and high crimes on the seas).

But when I was just reading over Article 1/Sec 8 I noticed the following:


To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union

That is interesting. Wonder what that is all about. Since the feds are not authorized to have an FBI, CIA, U.S. Marshall, etc, they have to rely on us to execute the laws?

pcosmar
10-12-2010, 07:07 PM
How it's supposed to work, and what we have today are two different things.

Jcambeis
10-13-2010, 01:54 PM
The way it should work is that if there's an injured party, the feds report it to the local Sheriff (the highest law officer in a county) and the Sheriff makes the arrest.

The US Constitution doesn't grant arrest powers, and doesn't need to because we the people delegated that power to our local elected Sheriff.

So is this another usurpation or power by the feds? Why isn't anyone talking about this? Are there any candidates out there that understand this and want to reverse any legislation that purports to use this power?

Here's a good reason why we didn't grant that power to a distant government:
"a president who claims the omnipotent power to ignore the Bill of Rights and an all-powerful military that claims the power to arrest, jail, and punish any American labeled a “terrorist,” including newspaper editors, government critics, and anti-war dissidents, without following the procedures set forth in the Bill of Rights. "
http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0606a.asp

The constitution was created by the states. everything not mentioned in the constitution is reserved to the states. Your idea that the federal government dictates to the states is the inverse of what the founders intended

ItsTime
10-13-2010, 02:45 PM
When was the first arrest by a federal agent?