Exclusive: FL Sheriff Arrested, Charged With Felony & Suspended For Protecting Citizens’ 2nd Amendment Rights

By: Michael Lotfi
452

UPDATE: Reports are surfacing that the FL Sheriff was found “not guilty” and has been reinstated.

Liberty County, FL-

In a developing story, Sheriff Nick Finch was arrested, charged with a felony and suspended without pay for supporting a citizen’s 2nd Amendment rights. It’s not a story you hear every day. It’s certainly not a story you’d expect out of a county named Liberty.

The events began when Floyd Eugene Parrish, a Florida resident, was arrested and detained by one of Finch’s deputies for carrying a firearm without a permit on March 8th, 2013. In the state of Florida, this lands you a 3rd degree felony charge. Finch released Parrish because, in his assessment, Parrish was not a violent criminal and was acting innocuously. Finch called the clerk and told her not to draw up arrest documents until he was there to assess the situation. Note, Parrish had not been officially booked into jail- only detained.Finch

The arresting deputy had multiple complaints for overstepping his authority from citizens over the past several months before Parrish’s arrest. A month after Parrish was released from jail Sheriff Finch decided he needed to launch an internal investigation against the deputy due to multiple complaints and phone calls he had received. Once the deputy found out that an investigation was going to be launched against him, he resigned to keep the investigation from occurring. On May 1st, the deputy, who was no longer employed in the state of Florida, filed a complaint against Finch for the Parrish arrest that took place more 2 months beforehand.

Rick Scott, Florida governor,  stepped in and had Finch arrested. Governor Scott then appointed a new sheriff. Finch says he did not vote for the Governor. “I’m not a republican, or a  democrat. Just a man who believes in the Constitution,” says Finch. A rally was recently organized by Libertarian gubernatorial candidate Adrian Wyllie. Governor Scott was invited to speak, but was a no show.

 

Below is our exclusive interview with Sheriff Finch:

Q1: How have things been going since the Governor stepped in and had you arrested?

A1: Things have been tough. Especially on the family. We are living on one income right now. Willie Meggs, the state attorney, actually has family in Liberty County and it seems they were part of the group who were against my election to begin with. This is one of the most corrupt attorneys in FL. Having to live at their side has not been easy.

Q2: Why do you believe Governor Scott  had you arrested?

A2: I think that once the state attorney filed charges against me Governor Scott had to step in. I’m shocked and amazed that it has gone this far. The Governor claims he is pro 2nd Amendment, but I’m not so sure. I have offered to take a lie-detector test for the Governor if he thinks I’m not being truthful about the events that night. I am trying to work with the Governor- not against him. 

Q3: Do you feel that the stop on Parrish (the man Sheriff Finch released from jail) by your deputy, which lead to discovery of the weapon and his subsequent arrest was constitutional?

A3: The deputy arrested Parrish for “failure to maintain the lane”. Upon stopping Parrish he was not drunk, or under the influence of any drugs. I myself have traveled that same road many times. It is a single lane and is crumbling. I have gone off the road there multiple times.  Regardless, Parrish told the deputy that he did have a weapon. The deputy the arrested him for not having a licence. Sadly, we do not have cameras on the patrol cars, so it is really the deputy’s word against Parrish’s as to whether or not his driving warranted a stop.   

Q4: If you could go back to that night in March would you do things differently?

A4: Absolutely not. I wouldn’t have done anything different. Once I became aware of the arrest, I immediately called the clerk and told her not to book Parrish. I am a Desert Storm veteran. I took an oath to protect the Constitution in the army and again as a sheriff. The state is charging me with destroying documents, which never existed. They do not have a case.


Q5: How long do you plan to fight for this case?

A5: I do not expect to be convicted of the crime. However, I’ll fight it all the way to the Supreme Court if I have to. The state already made me an offer that if I resign they will drop the charges. To me, this means they do not have a case and it seems there are political motives to push me out rather than seek justice.

Q6: It seems like the tea party, libertarian crowd has really got behind you. Is being an “independent” sort of code for being libertarian?

A6: Reagan was the first president I ever voted for. I was a republican for years before I became an independent. As far as I am concerned it seems like there is no difference now days between republicans and democrats. To answer your question though, yes I am certainly seeming to lean more libertarian now days. 

Tea parties around the country have reacted. Mark West, Chattanooga Tea Party President, tells us in an exclusive interview:

The Tea Party movement is united on multiple core issues. Of those core issues we hold the Constitution supreme. We are also united in protecting it from those who are attacking it in the states and federal government. This is probably one of the clearest examples of such an attack. Sheriff Finch took an oath to the Constitution of the United States of America. Because he took this oath seriously, Governor Scott sees it fit to have this elected sheriff arrested and charged with a felony. You’d expect more from a governor who claims to be a Republican, but no. As we are united on core issues, we must unite behind Sheriff Finch. This is a time for the grassroots to dig deep and take a stand. Finch is just one example of many. If we do not stand, it is only a matter of time before it is in our county. As an organization, the Chattanooga Tea Party has donated $500.00 to Finch’s defense fund, and many of our members have donated on top of that. Finch needs our support of the next months to years as he walks forward in this battle with his lawyers. He also needs our prayers. If we expect to have sheriffs who will protect our constitutional rights, then we have to support those brothers and sisters such as Finch who are willing to stand strong.

West tells us that a fundraiser/rally is planned for Finch on August 24th. The Chattanooga Tea Party vice president is flying down to Florida to support Finch. Supporters have set up a Facebook page to keep up with Finch’s case.

Sheriff Mack, Founder, President of the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), has taken a stand for Sheriff Finch. They have set up a defense fund for Finch and are rallying support from across the country.  I spoke with  Sheriff Mack about Finch’s case:

Obviously we are getting very involved. We are having a fundraiser in Panama City, FL this weekend. Finch stood against the enforcement of a law, which is contrary to the Constitution. He stood in courage. Everyone would be in jail if it wasn’t for sheriffs like Finch setting a great example as to what all sheriffs in this country should be doing. We have been able to send Finch $3.5k already, and we have already raised about another $5k.

Sheriff Mack tells me that the fundraiser in Florida this weekend will host some of the country’s finest constitutional sheriffs.

(EDIT 1)

Finch is being charged with violation of Florida Statute 838.022(1):  It is unlawful for a public servant, with corrupt intent to obtain a benefit for any person or to cause harm to another, to: (b): Conceal, cover up, destroy, mutilate, or alter any official record or official document or cause another person to perform such an act.

However, according to the state of Florida’s General Records Schedule any records of Parrish’s arrest lost their administrative value once Finch acted within his authority not to pursue charges against Parrish, and therefore could not longer be used or retained.

According to former prosecutor and attorney KrisAnne Hall:

You see, when Sheriff Finch used his proper authority to not pursue charges against Mr. Parish, the records pertaining to his arrest lost their “administrative value.”  Sheriff Finch, by this Florida Regulation was within his authority to destroy this record. The arrest affidavit of Sheriff Finch gives a pretty detailed account of what took place.  But the arrest affidavit NEVER mentions Parish being booked into custody.  Being placed in a jail cell is not being booked.  If the arrest affidavit is accurate, and we have to trust it to be as it was given under oath, then Parish was never booked so the log that contained his name was in error and the Sheriff’s office also had full authority to white out his name and make space for someone who was actually booked into the jail.

Finch first ran for Sheriff as a republican in 2008. He lost in that election cycle, and ran again as an independent when he finally won with the support of thousands in 2012. He first took office on January 1st, 2013.

The following two tabs change content below.
Michael Lotfi is a political analyst and strategist living in Nashville, Tennessee where he works as the executive director for the Tenth Amendment Center (TN). Lotfi also writes a column at The Washington Times called "American Millennial". Lotfi graduated in the top 5% of his class with honors from Belmont University, an award winning, private university located in Nashville, Tennessee.

  • shawnsBrain

    we need more cops like this sheriff

  • Daniel Chester

    If the Executive branch of the federal government can pick and choose which parts of which laws to enforce, then I don’t see an issue with a Sheriff doing the same.

  • Steve-in-Iowa

    A sheriff is voted into office by the People. If you’re appointed to office you’re not being held accountable by the People. I, for one, wouldn’t recognize the appointees “authority”. You know what would be hilarious, sheriff Finch should get himself on the ballot for governor of Florida.

    • RageFury

      That would indeed be hilarious. It would also be amusing if he got on the ballot and was re-elected Sheriff again.

      • Steve-in-Iowa

        Either one would send a strong message.

  • Dennis Carr

    Another reason not to move to Florida, you can die from fluoridation !

    “The state already made me an offer that if I resign they will drop the charges. To me, this means they do not have a case and it seems there are political motives to push me out rather than seek justice.”
    School yard bullies grow up to be real life bullies.. When they become in charge of our protection, we have none..

  • Rework Oh Ryan

    White text on dark background really messes with my eyes. Anyway, this Sheriff should be the example of how Sheriff’s behave, not charged with a felony

    • Daniel

      Ditto on that. Sometimes, I have a hard time reading the site. Maybe if the text were a little darker?

  • 2SHADES

    Perhaps you should vet the “accuracy”, or a lack there-of, of your articles a bit more…

    The Sheriff was NOT fired for protecting someone’s Second Amendment rights.

    What he WAS fired for, was REMOVING & DESTROYING LEGALLY FILED PAPERS (arrest files) and removing them from the record, to get his FRIEND’S BROTHER out of jail.

    THAT IS HIGHLY ILLEGAL.

    • cwm

      How about some proof of this? Where did you get your information?

    • akatom3565

      Where is that side of the story available to view?

    • joshparks

      This was covered in the article: “Finch called the clerk and told her not to draw up arrest documents until he was there to assess the situation. Note, Parrish had not been officially booked into jail – only detained.”

      “The state is charging me with destroying documents, which never existed. They do not have a case.”

      If you have evidence or proof of something else, please share.

    • Stephen Zeigler

      Your proof of this is where ?

    • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

      I am not demanding it by any means, but I would like to see the information to substantiate your claims. If you could let us know, that would be helpful. Could you please provide or direct us to those sources of information?

    • Jon Hawk

      Wrong…there was never any paper work to begin with so therefore nothing could be destroyed…he was fired for letting the man in question go and also for attempting to launch an investigation against a deputy who had been reported on multiple occasions of overstepping his lawful boundries and harrassment as well….

    • Michael Blake

      any proof?

  • http://lifelibertyand.net/ Mark West

    Great article Michael. Thanks for covering this critical story so that others can be aware of just what is at stake and how the lines are being drawn. If ever there was a time when liberty minded patriots must step up and take a stand, this is it. Remember the famous Martin-Niemöller quote:

    First they came for the communists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

    Then they came for the socialists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a socialist.

    Then they came for the trade unionists,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews,
    and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

    Then they came for me,
    and there was no one left to speak for me.

    • Mark Webb

      In this day and age it is the Communists, Socialists and Public Unions coming after the Capitalist, Christians, Conservatives, Heterosexuals, then the Jews.

  • Terry Johnson

    We all need to back this sheriff, he seems in all respects to be a very good man and deserves our help. SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL SHERIFF.

  • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

    We need peace officers, not police officers. Instead of policing the people and looking at the public as suspects, it should be about keeping the peace. Americans are obsessed with throwing people they don’t like into cages. It’s a sickness.

    • akatom3565

      So what do we do with the violent criminals? You want to talk about sickness, so we just keep the peace with murderers, pedophiles and rapist! Dick I am not sure what your issue is but this is the most questionable statement I have read in a while!

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        Did I say never put a person in jail? If I did please point it out to me and I will correct that error. When one has harmed another person or property, there should be punishments in the forms of fines and jail time. On the other hand, I was pointing out that people who do things that result in no victims are put in jail all the time. There are all kinds of laws that put people behind bars for actions that have no victims.

        Furthermore, the police are becoming increasingly aggressive toward the people they took an oath to protect and serve. Take an honest look at all of the stories of police misconduct and abuse. I am not happy that this is what it’s like, but I would be irrational to deny that it’s happening.

        • akatom3565

          Define keeping the peace? Peace keeping is not an arresting activity other wise the jails would be full where ever the US military is at to keep the peace. am I be to literal with your statement maybe I am but peace keeping is not holding people accountable it is keeping bigger issues from arising. How about the civilians that have done acts that are aggressive towards police officers. This is not a one way street and to state it as such shows lack of understanding. People are a whole lot less respectful of authority or their elders. Should there be investigations into misconduct absolutely yes, but look up the number of false claims before you brand everyone the same. As far as what I call you you have to earn my respect Richard before I call you mister Penny. Spent four years as a cop and I have heard it all before, you think we should just keep the peace till you really need them and then piss and moan when they are not there.

      • Jon Hawk

        Violent Criminals are not in play in this case..this is a simple case where the Sheriff made a judgement call to give this man a break about having a gun with no permit..which btw is not required according to our constitution. The officer he was going to have investigated had prior complaints of harrassment and overstepping his official boundries…if people would learn to read the entire story maybe they would better undertand the situation instead of just talking out their asses

      • Houston Retrievers

        That is self evident. No victim no crime. The law says two elements have to be met in order for their to be a crime, both a loss and an injury. The state cannot enjoin itself to a claim as a victim in order to satisfy the elements that would be punishable under the RICO act.

  • Don Lockwood

    I’m trying to figure out how an elected sheriff can just be dismissed off the job like he was a peon employee of the county. Seems there would have to be a recall vote or official procedure. The whole system is FUBAR.

    • Houston Retrievers

      My thoughts too. No way can a governor lawfully do this to a Sheriff and then appoint his own Sheriff without an election…. Bunch of maniacs and psychopaths controlling this country.

  • http://www.AutoDamageExperts.com/ Barrett R. Smith, AAM

    I’ll keep in prayer the Constitution and those who fight for it. I don’t know the facts but I hope in the end this Sheriff is indeed vindicated and gets his job back…we need brave Americans at such positions for when push comes to shove, will stand and defend against those who would destroy our Republic!

  • Matt Berkebill

    I commend Sheriff Finch for holding to the principles of the Constitution. He indeed knows the meaning of the word “Liberty”. Too bad that scoundrel Mr. Scott doesn’t share that same sentiment. I’m not sure of the big letter that accompanies Mr. Scott’s name (political persuasion), but I would suspect his real party affiliation does NOT hold to the Republic nor Democracy.

  • Mikey San

    Let me get this straight.
    1-The state of Florida law requires a permit to carry a fire arm.
    2-The driver was stopped, had a gun and no permit.
    3-The driver broke the law and was arrested by the deputy.
    4-The sheriff let’s the driver go breaking his oath to uphold Florida law
    because he doesn’t agree with the law, and commits a felony in doing
    so.
    5-The sheriff then initiates an illegal investigation against his deputy who
    was upholding Florida law and is in turn arrested at the direction of
    the governor of the state of Florida for breaking the law.

    And somehow, people want to support an ex-sheriff – law breaker who
    committed a felony and attempted to ruin the career of a deputy who was
    doing his job according to the laws of the state?

    Why?
    Just because they think people should be able to carry guns without a permit?

    So it’s now ok to break the laws of the state and abuse your authority simply because you don’t agree with the law?

    Lol… Finch is a criminal. Even one of the most conservative governors in America recognizes that. The only people upholding the constitution in this story are Rick Scott (who I despise) and the deputy.

    The tea-bagger party seems to be the party of anarchy these days. It probably should be renamed the crack-pot party.

    • Tim

      When injustice becomes legal, resistance becomes duty.

      • Mikey San

        We live in a nation of laws with checks and balances in place to prevent abuse and anarchy. Resistance is not always necessary. To change the law one only needs to challenge that law in court. The law is decided by our nations judges who are elected by the majority and sworn to uphold the constitution. It is the duty of our state and federal judges and our supreme court to decide what is just or unjust -
        - not the tea-baggers or other minority groups of ideologues with differing opinions.

        If you don’t like the laws or want to change the law or the constitution there is a procedure to follow and it’s not all that difficult.

        And when your opinion is ruled out by the majority in a court of law, it’s the action of a juvenile to whine and cry about it. Maybe it would be a good time to evaluate why your opinion is in the minority.

        • Roach

          “You only need to challenge the law in court.”

          Yeah I am sure that would have worked out great for MLK. The court system did not make those changes because the law was challenged by a lawyer in court. The changes were made by brave people, in the streets, protesting the law.

          Now I am not a millionaire, just as I assume most of you aren’t. How are we supposed to spend years in court fighting an unjust law. I find your argument tedious.

          • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

            If you go by his logic, you still rely on the same lawmakers who passed the bad law to begin with. Or you can exercise your right to vote for bad or worse…which results in more politicians like the ones who passed the bad law.

            That argument was created so people conform to a system that gives them the illusion of choice. As far as I can tell, the only way any real change happens is through voting with your wallet, your values, and your choices.

          • Mikey San

            “As far as I can tell, the only way any real change happens is through voting with your wallet, your values, and your choices.”

            That’s pretty much the point I was trying to make. That, and it’s not up to an ideologue sheriff.

        • Houston Retrievers

          Maybe it would be wise for you to get your head out of your arse. We are a Republic with a rule of law, not a Democracy where mob rule is the law.

    • CharlieKilo

      Actually, you have it wrong. Law Enforcement makes a choice, on a daily basis, on what laws to enforce. If a LEO decides not to charge you with something, that is their prerogative. By exercising that choice, it’s not unlawful or illegal.

      The Sheriff has every right to initiate an investigation into his/her subordinates.

      And finally, simply because a law is “on the books” in a state, does not mean that it usurps the Constitution.

      So, given those little tidbits of information, it’s clear you don’t have the slightest clue on what you are talking about. But, feel free to keep braying away to anyone that will listen to your uneducated nonsense.

      • Mikey San

        Actually it’s you that has it wrong. Law enforcement is in place to do just that, not to make choices on what to enforce. It’s not their job to decide whether to let a person go or not when the law has clearly been broken.

        Lol… and those tidbits of info are basically just bits of your bullshit opinion.

        • FedUp

          My husband once stopped a guy for speeding and tried to give him a warning. The guy argued his way into a ticket. You must be that guy.

        • CharlieKilo

          Uh, no. Allow me to point out your ignorance, yet again. Please explain how law enforcement is “allowed” to decide whether or not to cite you for a traffic violation or to let you go if you break the law. If you can’t come up with any other reason, besides the one I gave, then you are simply blowing hot air. In case you didn’t know, it’s called Law Enforcement Discretionary Authority. In Florida, I suggest you review Everton, 468 So. 2d at 938.

          A Sheriff (or any chief law enforcement officer) can initiate an investigation of their subordinates if there is just cause. Given the information at hand (past abuse by the deputy in question), I’d say the investigation is warranted. If past history had not been available, then no investigation would be warranted.

          And finally, the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. Did you miss that in your Civics class or are you just that dense?

          To summarize, it’s not about opinion on my part, it’s about fact. But, feel free to keep braying on, and on, and on…. Care for me to embarrass you some more? I rather enjoy highlighting ignorance one person at a time….

          • Mikey San

            Ah… so now I’m ignorant and dense.
            Please allow me to point out YOUR ignorance and oversight.

            The deputy actually made the arrest. That’s a fact.
            The sheriff was not the arresting officer.
            Whether the driver broke the law or not is what’s in question.
            The sheriff took it upon himself to let the driver go based on an opinion not a legal basis (at least not Florida law – according to the article).
            I don’t have a problem with the sheriff conducting an investigation – if it was legal. The point I attempted to make was that it’s possible that the investigation may have crossed a legal line – there just aren’t enough facts in the article to know.

            Why else would a conservative governor want to bust one of his conservative sheriffs. Does that make any sense to you or are you the one who’s dense?

          • CharlieKilo

            Since you seem to lack the basic ability to grasp hierarchy, let me explain. A Deputy, or Deputy Sheriff, works for THE Sheriff. The Deputy works at the convenience of the Sheriff, meaning the Sheriff is the ultimate responsible party. When you are ticketed or arrested by a Deputy, it’s done by direction of the Sheriff as if he/she had done the arrest or ticket themselves. Do you have any more questions or require any more clarifications?

          • Mikey San

            Since you lack the basic ability to follow along on this thread and stick to the real issue in the article, please allow me to put this conversation back on track, putting it into cartoon terms so you can comprehend.
            Deputy Dog made an arrest (presumably a lawful arrest under Florida state law) and Sheriff Yosemite Sam let Elmer Fudd (the driver) go because he had some kind of My Little Pony dream that his opinion trumped state law. So Florida governor Dick Dastardly busts the law breaking Yosemite Sam and now poor Sam is boo hoo-ing all the way to jail and all of you 2nd amendment gun freaks feel sorry for him and can’t wrap your head around why the majority of the people in this country including right wing nut job Dastardly recognize that he broke the law and you just can’t see it.

            da, da, da, tha, tha, that’s all folks!

          • CharlieKilo

            Let me break it down for you Barney style, since you seem to relate to that methodology. A Deputy works for the Sheriff, only under his discretion and at his authority, makes an arrest of Joe Blow. That arrest, actually is the Sheriff’s arrest, since the Deputy is subject to that Sheriff who deputized him. So, by direction, Joe Blow was arrested by the Sheriff through his proxy, the Deputy. Is that clear enough for you or do I have to break out Crayons (hoping you won’t eat them)?

            Since you want to bring it back to the article, so to speak, then you must have caught the part where no paperwork was filed. So, breaking it down Barney style (again), the arrest wasn’t fully completed.

            Again, I can do this all day long. As long as you want to continue looking like an idiot, I will continue making you appear that way.

          • Mikey San

            It doesn’t matter if the sheriff is in charge or not, the sheriff broke the law – that’s why he was arrested. If you have proof otherwise, put up or shut up. Otherwise, the only one who resembles an idiot here is you.

          • CharlieKilo

            It’s a good thing you aren’t involved with the law in any way…. It doesn’t work that way, you have to provide the proof that he committed said crime. However, given that the article (since you want to use this source as a point of reference) states that no paperwork existed and the Sheriff destroyed nothing.

            Also, I provided the reference (proof) that the Sheriff ultimately has the jurisdiction to decide if the charge is pushed to the State/Commonwealth for prosecution, it’s in my earlier post (with the applicable case law for you to track down). For a quick review, it’s called Law Enforcement Discretionary Authority. So, proof or not, it’s irrelevant. The Sheriff gets to make the call on whether the charges that his Deputies make (in his name) are justified or warranted.

            Let’s review, shall we? No paperwork existed, according to the article. Even if it did, the Sheriff is the one that ultimately makes the call on what is pushed to Prosecutors. It is the prerogative of the Sheriff (or his actors, Deputies) to enforce laws. Meaning, they can chose to enforce or not enforce. Ultimately the chief law enforcement officer, the Sheriff, is the big dog that makes the call since the Deputies work for the Sheriff. Typically, in cases like these, the Governor has a “chat” with the Sheriff. It’s unlikely and unprecedented for a Governor to initiate charges. Because, cases like these have happened in the past. There’s more to this, you just don’t seem to know it.

        • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

          It’s one thing to be incorrect. It’s another thing to be uncivil.

      • 2SHADES

        And actually you’re wrong.

        What you’re describing is whether or not a cop decides to bust you for something you are currently doing or have just done.

        What THIS case is about is someone who was ALREADY IN JAIL and papers filed.

        It’s NOT the cop’s place to determine what happens AFTER the arrest, it’s the DA’s job.

        So, you’re wrong.

    • BillyKidd

      totally ignore the fact that the deputy repeatedly was overstepping his authority even before this arrest of a guy with a gun

      • Mikey San

        According to who? What are the facts on that? The article states so, but doesn’t provide any further information.

        • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

          Are you providing any information substantiating that the sheriff broke the law?

          • Mikey San

            Are you providing any that he didn’t?

    • Michael Blake

      i guess you do not understand that the U.S Constitution trumps all other laws!!! Read the Constitution so you may be enlighten.

      • 2SHADES

        You don’t get it and it’s typical of truthers like you.

        It’s NOT whether or not the guy had a GUN, it’s the fact that the SHERIFF BROKE THE LAW in manipulating & destroying LEGALLY FILED PAPERS in order to CHANGE THE RECORD to get someone (who happened to be a FRIEND) FREED & CLEARED.

        Sorry bud, but you need to wise up a bit.

        Now to address YOUR point. Just because something may or may not be unconstitutional, you can CERTAINLY go do it, but UNTIL the date that YOU get your ass out there and CHANGE THE LAW, then you’re subject to the regulations which have been set forth, like it or not.

        And NO COP can illegally CHANGE LEGAL DOCUMENTS ESPECIALLY ONCE FILED.

        If you think it’s any different, then YOU are the one who is accepting of TYRANNY by authorities, because as I wrote earlier, if you allow a cop to break the law EVEN FOR WHAT YOU THINK IS A GOOD REASON, you’re allowing them to break the law for ANY reason, and MOST OFTEN that includes TYRANNICAL reasons.

        Which you’d then be bitching about if they slighted an innocent person.

        You can’t have it both ways, you have to pick a side, either you’re for cops doing ILLEGAL things or you’re for them being held accountable when they do illegal things.

        Pick a side and stay on it.

        • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

          Does this apply to the Attorney General and the President? Technically, they have violated several laws, or failed to enforce them.

          • Mikey San

            According to whom?
            The tea party? Republicans? Fox News???

          • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

            When a Supreme Court makes a ruling on a law, then the President ignores the ruling, according to your thinking he should be charged with a felony.

            When Eric Holder refused to pursue the voter intimidation case of the New Black Panther party, according to your thinking, he should have been charged with a felony.

            There are all kinds of examples. But you know that. You are just so caught up in your ideology that you want to deny reality.

            And while you are asking for info substantiating claims, why not produce some yourself? Where is the information substantiating your claims about the sheriff?

          • Christopher Stuart

            LOL. . .let me get this straight. . .the best counterpoint to your post the people here can come up with is, “Well um, yeah, Obama sucks! I”m angry at Obama!” (what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?) Sounds like to me this Sherriff was practicing “Law enforcement political activism” rather than following the law. Of course, the “gun activists” here can cheer him for his activism but then cry to me when the Supreme Court practices judicial activism of their own kind. His job was to enforce the laws on the book, not interpret or make law. Now, maybe his deputy was being a little “fastidious” with the failure to maintain a lane thing but we all know no one would cry if the deputy pulled over a drunk driver. It’s kind of beside the point. . .it’s up to the courts to sort that out once the arrest has been made.

          • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

            Why would you put quotes around words I didn’t say? That is disingenuous, misleading, and dishonest.

            Frankly, I am not angry at all.

            I am simply pointing out that if that line of thinking is correct, shouldn’t it apply to government officials of any political party?

            I am far past the point of defending any politician based on party. I am a political atheist. I dispassionately observe corruption and unscrupulous behavior from both major parties.

            I am equally critical of GOP and DEM alike. But you are fixated on your identity as a leftist, so you lashed out against me based on your assumptions and attachments.

            By the way, according to your response and your stated line of thinking, you would logically be just as adamant about the president’s failure to enforce laws. You would logically want to apply your line of thinking equally. However, that is not the case.

            So, your response can be boiled down to…
            Right wing bad. Left wing good.

          • Christopher Stuart

            No, I lashed out at the Libertarian Right’s temptation to invoke the name of Obama during every discussion, as if that will score them points in the discussion at hand. Finally, FINALLY, Newt Ginrich went public and said we have to move on besides being “anti-Obama.” I hope most anti-Obama-ers take note and decide to be FOR SOMETHING rather than against Obama.

            The ol’ “Rebel Without A Clue” philosophy gets old as I mature.

            I certainly lean Left on a lot of issues. I guess I am a RINO-Independent-Blue Dog Democrat if you need to pigeonhole me.

            All I usually ask for is some consistency, something the Right seems to struggle with more than the Left lately.

            If you are against Judicial Activism, then you have to be against Law Enforcement activism. Now, I don’t know the whole story here and neither do you, what happened on that lone highway and what transpired. . .all we know is a fella was carrying a gun without a permit. If we all wanted the charges dismissed (which I am not opposed to actually. . .good people make mistakes), there are ways to remedy that through the system. Everyone SHOULD know guns = trouble. . .when you buy one you HAVE To know the laws in your state, right? I am uncomfortable with a Sherriff making a decision arbitrarily on who gets off and who doesn’t.

            AS YOU SHOULD BE. AS ALL LIBERTARIANS SHOULD BE.

            Would have he been as “active” if the fella was a black NYC resident moseying through Florida? See the problem with cheering him on? And that’s just it. . .you SHOULD but all we seem to hear from Libertarians is “Constitution/Guns Good. Everything else bad.” lately.

            Sorry, I support the 2nd Amendment but I am not going to rally to your cause just because you waved a flag.

          • Houston Retrievers

            Oh but when your side is engaged in judicial activism and all three branches of government are colluding to usurp the rights of the people, its all okay…

          • Christopher Stuart

            Yes, right. It’s all a conspiracy. . .and we are doing it via the special mind control device we have hidden in your computer and are using the internet.

            The only way to combat this is to cover your head in tin foil. I would do it now.

          • Houston Retrievers

            According to the law. You lefties swing far left and right all the time as a way to simply serve your interest. I wish the real fight would get started already. This planet needs cleansed of people who have no moral or religious beliefs.

          • Mikey San

            “You lefties”… Lol

            I heard of another guy who wanted to cleanse the planet of people who were different… I hear he came to a nasty end in 1945 after carrying a campaign of genocide….

            Oh wait,… you’re from Texas??? Ahhh… that explains your comment…

            Never mind.

          • Michael Langley

            Not a good thing to say! How many atheists might be saved, if given a little more time on this earth? It was definitely not what a Christian should say! God is the only one to judge! But, the sheriff was the one who decided to not arrest (given a warning?!). It was his prerogative as the “deputize-er”! He was the boss!

          • Houston Retrievers

            Reply

            to Michael Langley
            “Not a good thing to say! How many atheists might be saved, if given a
            little more time on this earth? It was definitely not what a Christian
            should say! God is the only one to judge! But, the sheriff was the one
            who decided to not arrest (given a warning?!). It was his prerogative
            as the “deputize-er”! He was the boss!”

            Not sure why your comment is gone, but you want to play the religious card against me while being the one who is judging. Get a clue

          • Dwight Einzinger

            Mikey the Troll. Don’t bother with him. Its a mental issue. Go take your meds Mikey

        • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

          If you could, please provide the info sources that substantiate your claims that the sheriff broke the law by manipulating and destroying legally filed papers. That would be helpful in understanding you argument.

          While you are at it, please describe the characteristics “typical truther”. That would also help us understand your argument.

        • Mikey San

          I couldn’t have said it better… Thanks.

        • Houston Retrievers

          There were no papers…… The supreme court has already ruled that all laws which are contrary to the constitution is not law and wholly without effect. What they are functioning under is Color of Law. It is defined as looking and smelling like law but is not law at all and no court is bound to enforce it. I dont like the ending because like the welfare clause its to vague and ripe to be abused.

          • 2SHADES

            Care to prove it?

            Tell ya what, go to FL, carry a concealed without a license and tell me how far your mantra get’s you.

            See, what you’re doing is trying to jump the fence when it’s convenient for you.

            What you’re talking about “color of law”, while technically true, DOES NOT APPLY HERE.

            Why? Because this country is not protected by the ORIGINAL Constitution, and NEITHER are your rights protected by them.

            If you’re talking “color of law”, you’re then talking about corporate fictions, missing amendments, the Corporatization of the country, etc…

            Guess what the Constitution DOES NOT PROTECT…

            EXACTLY!

            So like I said, if you’re THAT confident, go ahead and do it, let’s see what you come up with.

            As long as we’re citizens (that means a slave of the US corporation) we are subject to their rules.

            Which is EXACTLY WHY you see judges, oftentimes, become IRATE and pissed when people bring up the Constitution & their rights in court.

      • Mikey San

        You guess wrong – but that’s to be expected.

        The constitution does trump all other law and the supreme court interprets the law according to the constitution. The supreme court has ruled on this issue.
        Maybe you should read the supreme courts ruling so that you can be enlightened.

        • Dwight Einzinger

          Mikey the Troll. Your Liberal rhetoric doesn’t fly here. A Sheriff is public elected official and has a duty to not uphold laws that are unconstitutional. If you have a question about his Oath, here it is.

          “I do solemnly swear that I will support, protect and defend the Constitution and Government of the United States, and of the State of Florida; that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the State; and that I will well and faithfully perform the duties of —- County Sheriff on which I am now about to enter. So help me God.”

          • Jenn Chandler

            I’m waiting for someone to show offense because the oath mentions God and there is a separation of church and state…..hahahaha

    • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

      So, next time an officer lets you off with a warning when you get
      pulled over for speeding, we should arrest that officer on felony
      charges?

      May you be treated how you would like others to be treated.

      Rules are rules! Any deviation shall be punished to the fullest extent! There
      is no room for the spirit of the law. It will be the letter of the law
      at all times. We shall follow the orders of our wise overlords without
      question. Get in line, citizen!

      The Kinks wrote a song for you called “Yes, sir. No,sir.”

      • Mikey San

        They also wrote a song named “Victoria” which was about patriotism.

        • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

          They also wrote one about a transvestite named Lola. My point was that “Yes,sir. No, sir.” suited your line of thinking.

          “Victoria” is satire, by the way.

          • Mikey San

            Yes, satire about the British standing patriotic under a harsh government. – You know your music… that’s cool.

      • Jenn Chandler

        Dig your sarcasm brother! Kinks are awesome.

    • myangelnheaven

      @Mikey San – I guess if you think that Finch broke the law, then you must REALLY see how Obama has broken MANY laws!!! Obama is a CRIMINAL, and yet you haven’t said a WORD about that! Enough said!

      • Mikey San

        I haven’t stated my opinion on the president or political party.
        My opinion here is simply about this article.

        Laws get broken all the time – it’s up to the justice system to handle those issues. I thought we were talking about a Sheriff in Florida – not the president.
        But then for the most part, only right wing nut cases are calling the president a criminal. The problem is, not one of them can provide proof of that which can be brought before a court of law because they would get laughed at – and they have been laughed at.
        We all have opinions – and that’s just fine by me, you’re entitled to yours.
        But the law of the land is laid down by the courts and a true patriot abides by the law and uses the courts and justice system to change those laws if they consider them unjust.
        True patriots don’t support people who break our nations laws.

        • Jenn Chandler

          A true patriot also doesn’t follow the laws that go against the constitution. You must be an Obama supporting Democrat. <—-that was an opinion! I'll be damned if I support a law that is unconstitutional.

    • dave

      its not an illegal investigation it an “Internal Investigation” these are not uncommon when a deputy has complaints about overstepping his authority. After reading the report the gun was not on his body which mean the gun wasn’t on him but in his vehicle. you do not need a license in Florida to keep a weapon in your car! whats wrong with carrying a gun without a permit i just learned that in Virginia you can open carry without a permit. Ive yet to see a problem with it!

      • Mikey San

        I stand corrected – you’re right on that point – it was an internal investigation. It’s only an illegal investigation if it’s discovered that the Sheriff was pursuing improperly or out of malice. Which may or may not be the case here depending on whether the deputy was actually following the law or not.

        • Houston Retrievers

          So its okay to suspect there is a law broken without actually knowing the law you take an oath to protect. Wow, Im santa and I take an oath to deliver free toys every year to good kids. If that were true and it was a public declaration and the people believed it to be true and I refused to do it, Id be sued and Id lose.

        • DannoDISQ

          No encase ment is required. It must ONLY be out of one’s MANUAL POSSESSION. Don’t confuse Florida’s laws with the mega-liberal Detroit and Washington DC jurisdictions.

        • DannoDISQ

          No PERMIT required to have a firearm in your vehicle while it is off your private property and out of your manual possession.

          • Mikey San

            State of Florida – Vehicle carry without a license is permitted.

            Handguns – must be either “securely encased” or not immediately available for use. “Securely encased” means in a glove compartment, whether or not locked;
            snapped in a holster; in a gun case, whether or not locked; in a zippered gun case; or in a closed box or container which requires a lid or cover to be opened for access. Carry of a Handgun on one’s person inside a vehicle without a license
            is not permitted (except in the case of open carry in accordance with the law outlined above). Once a handgun is securely encased, it can be stored anywhere inside the vehicle and is not limited to just the glove compartment/center console.

      • DannoDISQ

        You have read the report; the PC affidavit for Parrish’s arrest ? Could you post it please ?

    • David Williamson

      fl law allows you to transport your weapon in your car Its considered private property. So the sheriff did the correct thing.

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        If that is the case, then this is pretty clear cut. I am actually surprised to hear any government agency respecting or acknowledging private property rights.

      • Mikey San

        That’s true, in Florida you can carry a weapon in the car without a permit but it has to be encased and not accessible. So we don’t really know if the Sheriff did the correct thing or not. The Deputy may or may not have been correct in the arrest given the circumstances.

    • Richard W.

      You seem to be about as sharp as a hammer. You clearly have no idea what the Constitution is, let alone what upholding it means. If you did you would be siding with the former sheriff who upheld the Constitution allowing a man who was using his basic human right protected under the second amendment, to go free. The very same sheriff who understands that the Constitution states that no law made by the states may contradict the Constitution and if such a law is passed it is not enforceable. What is criminal is the number of ignorant people such as yourself that live in our great country and yet don’t even know anything about our Constitution and what it stands for.

      • Mikey San

        You seem to be a bone head that believes that anyone can just break a law if they disagree with it.
        Pretty cool for a backyard constitutional lawyer. Good luck with that career.

    • Patriot4America

      Our right to bear arms is assured by the Constitution, NOT local or federal authorities

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        The right to defend yourself to any extent necessary to preserve your own life and property is a law of nature, preceding any document.

    • EXcop88

      Very true, as a police officer or Deputy/Sheriff. It’s your job to uphold the law. Many officers do not like every law, so maybe we should let them bend it, whenever they want. Not sure what the issue is here. Gosh forbid if the initial police officer let him go, with no permit and someone found out.

      • KrisAnne Hall

        As a SHERIFF its your job to honor your oath to support and defend the Constitution. When the law violates the Constitution, the oath overrides the law.

        http://www.krisannehall.com/index.php/blog/68-2nd-amendment-for-dummies-and-tyrants

      • Houston Retrievers

        What about the law that says we all have the right to keep and bear arms as individuals? The constitution is the law and all laws from it are to be in compliance to it.

        If the law says I have the right to be armed and you do not have the right to infringe on it, and you choose to infringe on it, how is my breaking a rule of higher concern then you who broke the law trying to usurp my rights.

        • EXcop88

          Well, in that case many states that require a permit, are all wrong and needs to be abolished. Why not have no background checks or permits at all. This way felony sex offenders, terrorists and mentally unstable peeps, can legally arm themselves. As they all fall under Constitutional right.

          • Richard W.

            There is a difference between using your rights and obeying the law and being a felon who has broken the law already. You are correct in that states that require a permit to carry a weapon are in themselves breaking the law which is our Constitution.

          • Houston Retrievers

            Yes they are all wrong, the words are self explanatory. You cant say I believe in the 2nd amendment but……
            Either you do or you do not. Either you believe in the right of people to defend themselves or you dont. You can make up all the reasons to be afraid of people having guns, and yes some are legitimate but none of them are worth giving up my rights for. These kind of people that you have referred to crop up because of socialism and welfare, they are the cause, the rulers know it and they will never admit to it because its part of their control/fear racket. I prefer to defend myself and my property. I prefer the government get out of the way of people cleaning house. I prefer that the law stop tying the hands of good people while bad people get passes. I would prefer anyone afraid of their shadow go fall in a shallow grave and stop infringing on the rest of us who are okay and able to manage our own lives and affairs.

    • Guest

      1. “Tea-bagger party?” The LEFTIST Governor Rick Scott, who arrested the American Constitutionalist Sheriff, was billed as “tea party,” right?

      2. Which FEDERAL amendment, AMENDS OR REPEALS the 2nd Amendment, which states “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED?” (registration/licensing/regs ARE INFRINGEMENTS)

      3. “Anarchy” is ABSENCE of law – better reflecting the actions of FAKE-TEA GOPer Rick Scott. Finch, WAS FOLLOWING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – the OPPOSITE of “anarchy.”

      4. Semi-related question: How many Sheriffs have been arrested for ignoring IMMIGRATION LAW?

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        Anarchy…

        An = no or not

        Archy = the state or government

        Anarchy is a word used incorrectly on purpose. It does not mean chaos or the absence of laws. This means a society that serves these functions and provides services through private means, thus allowing people to “fire” their police department and “hire” another one, as one example. This creates competition and makes them act better in order to keep their jobs. Police tasering old people in wheel chairs? Hire a new police service provider.

        But who would pave the roads, right?

        How could we get along without government delivering mail, paving roads, providing jails, telling us what food we should and shouldn’t eat, etc…

        People would just wander around in circles or immediately become barbarians, killing, raping, and pillaging.

        Anarchy is just an idea….one the establishment has intentionally made to equate to chaos and danger.

        They do the same thing with third parties or anything that doesn’t fall in line with them maintaining power and control.

      • Cin

        Anarchy means without “leaders” not without laws.

    • KrisAnne Hall

      Mickey San, please read these facts before you speak any further. You are operating on half truths. http://www.krisannehall.com/index.php/blog/95-fl-sheriff-arrested-by-governor-scott-for-defending-right-to-bear-arms

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        Some people would make themselves believe the earth is the center of the universe if it meant defending a political party. Why? Who knows?

        • Jenn Chandler

          Richard, too many people have been conditioned by the mainstream media and our tyrannical government. Many Americans have turned into sheep who are following the wolves that will eventually have them for a meal.

      • Mikey San

        Like what? Name one.

    • Houston Retrievers

      Ok, lets assume you have a valid argument for one sec…. You are all for the Sherriff being arrested and charged for breaking the law?

      But you are not okay with arresting and charging those who created the law which in and of itself is against the law……

      You got some messed up logic.

    • Floridagunguy

      I live in Florida and am a gun owner. Here are the laws.

      1. You can open carry if you can prove you’re on your way to, coming from, or in the process of hunting or fishing.
      2. You may conceal carry with a permit
      3. You may have in your possession at anytime a firearm on your own personal property (your vehicle is considered personal property)
      4. You do not need to register firearms.

      This man was within his legal rights to have this firearm

      • Mikey San

        You forgot the part that says the gun in the vehicle can’t be on your person and must be encased and not readily accessible…
        The driver was probably not following the state law, hence his arrest, – but nobody on this site has given any info about the details.

      • bobfairlane

        Well, in that case, Floridians just need to all become professional hunters and fishermen.

    • Matt

      From my understanding of the article, it seems the sheriff believed the deputy was illegally stopping drivers. In this case, the driver was not under the influence and the sheriff viewed the reason, “failure to maintain the lane”, as another illegal stop.

      You can’t maintain a lane if it’s in poor condition.

  • viper623

    I think the governor needs his asws kicked , recalled and thrown out of office, communist bastard

  • Darwin Duckman

    I think what some people fail to realize is that often the best way to maintain peace in a small community is to bend the law, And it makes you wonder about the deputy If he was a good clean cop why he need to quit to prevent further investigation. I think he was a dirty cop with something to hide and saw an opportunity to remove his greatest threat, a cop who is friendly with his community. The best kind of cop actually because I believe they will do what is best not was is the law, sometimes that means letting someone off with a warning instead of a 3rd degree felony charge.

    • DannoDISQ

      FDLE must be corrupt because corruption investigations of deputies should not stop just because they resign. I replaced a corrupt officer in Miami years ago when I transferred to his zone. The agency didn’t want the embarrassment of an investigation. In-house disciplinary actions are the rule. We need laws that disallow hiding this and all corruption !!! Thanks FDLE.

  • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

    America used to be a place where you could do anything you wanted unless it was expressly prohibited. Now it’s a place where you cannot do anything unless it is expressly permitted.

    America went away. They replaced it with the US.

    • Jenn Chandler

      Welcome to the United Corporation of America! I want my country back. It used to be the greatest country on Earth.

  • Laura Whetstine

    Rick Scott can choose to keep this going and destroy a good man. I can choose not to vote for Scott ever again. I think all charges should be dropped.

  • vicman

    why doesnt this story have any dates or up to date information. this story dates back to June. there must have been some development in this story in the past two moths.

    • KrisAnne Hall

      vicman, see my post above, I have given additional information and an update.

  • Patriot4America

    RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS

    The right to bear arms is a tradition with deep roots in American society. Thomas Jefferson proposed that “no free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms,” and Samuel Adams called for an amendment banning any law “to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” The Constitution of the State of Arizona, for example, recognizes the “right of an individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the State.”

    Although this right is apparently protected by the Second Amendment to the Constitution, in practice it is subject to great deal of controversy. The two opposing interpretations of the Second Amendment involve whether the Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to keep and bear arms or whether it guarantees the states freedom from federal government infringement on this right. Individual rights proponents claim that the framers intended to preserve the individual right, above the right of the state. Proponents of States’ rights claim that the Second Amendment was adopted with the primary purpose of preserving the state militia.

    When the U.S. Constitution was adopted, each of the states had its own “militia” – a military force comprised of ordinary citizens serving as part-time soldiers. The militia was “well-regulated” in the sense that its members were subject to various requirements such as training, supplying their own firearms, and engaging in military exercises away from home. It was a form of compulsory military service intended to protect the fledgling nation from outside forces and from internal rebellions.

    The “militia” was not, as the gun lobby will often claim, simply another word for the people at large. Indeed, membership in the 18th century militia was generally limited to able-bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 – hardly encompassing the entire population of the nation.

    The U.S. Constitution established a permanent professional army, controlled by the federal government. With the memory of King George III’s troops fresh in their minds, many of the “anti-Federalists” feared a standing army as an instrument of oppression. State militias were viewed as a counterbalance to the federal army and the Second Amendment was written to prevent the federal government from disarming the state militias.

    In the 20th century, the Second Amendment has become an anachronism, largely because of drastic changes in the militia it was designed to protect. We no longer have the citizen militia like that of the 18th century.

    Today’s equivalent of a “well-regulated” militia – the National Guard – has more limited membership than its early counterpart and depends on government-supplied, not privately owned, firearms. Gun control laws have no effect on the arming of today’s militia, since those laws invariably do not apply to arms used in the context of military service and law enforcement. Therefore, they raise no serious Second Amendment issues.

    As a matter of law, the meaning of the Second Amendment has been settled since the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in U.S. v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939). In that case, the Court ruled that the “obvious purpose” of the Second Amendment was to “assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness” of the state militia.

    Since Miller, the Supreme Court has addressed the Second Amendment twice more, upholding New Jersey’s strict gun control law in 1969 and upholding the federal law banning felons from possessing guns in 1980. Furthermore, twice – in 1965 and 1990 – the Supreme Court has held that the term “well-regulated militia” refers to the National Guard.

    In the early 1980s, the Supreme Court addressed the Second Amendment issue again, after the town of Morton Grove, Illinois, passed an ordinance banning handguns (making certain reasonable exceptions for law enforcement, the military, and collectors). After the town was sued on Second Amendment grounds, the Illinois Supreme Court and the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that not only was the ordinance valid, but there was no individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment (Quillici v. Morton Grove). In October 1983, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of this ruling, allowing the lower court rulings to stand.

    In 1991, former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger referred to the Second Amendment as “the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word �fraud,’ on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime…[the NRA] ha(s) misled the American people and they, I regret to say, they have had far too much influence on the Congress of the United States than as a citizen I would like to see – and I am a gun man.” Burger also wrote, “The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon…[S]urely the Second Amendment does not remotely guarantee every person the constitutional right to have a �Saturday Night Special’ or a machine gun without any regulation whatever. There is no support in the Constitution for the argument that federal and state governments are powerless to regulate the purchase of such firearms…”

    Since the Miller decision, lower federal and state courts have addressed the meaning of the Second Amendment in more than thirty cases. In every case, up until March of 1999 (see below), the courts decided that the Second Amendment refers to the right to keep and bear arms only in connection with a state militia. Even more telling, in its legal challenges to federal firearms laws like the Brady Law and the assault weapons ban, the National Rifle Association makes no mention of the Second Amendment. Indeed, the National Rifle Association has not challenged a gun law on Second Amendment grounds in several years.

    On March 30, 1999, U.S. District Judge for Northern Texas Sam R. Cummings restored a domestic abuser’s firearms, citing the Second Amendment as guaranteeing an individual right to keep and bear arms. This decision flies in the face of years of precedence and jurisprudence and can only be viewed as a renegade decision. In his opinion, Judge Cummings was unable to follow usual judicial practice and cite legal precedents that support his decision because there are none. This ruling has been appealed and since that decision, two federal courts, including a higher Circuit court, have ruled that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to keep and bear arms (Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis).

    Even if one believes that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms, does that mean that all gun control laws are unconstitutional? Of course not. In fact, several states have clauses in their state constitutions which explicitly guarantee an individual right to keep and bear arms, yet not a single gun control law has been overturned in those states for violating that clause.

    The rights guaranteed by the Constitution have never been absolute. The First Amendment protects the freedom of the press, yet libel laws prevent newspapers from printing malicious lies about a person. The First Amendment also protects free speech, yet one cannot yell “Fire” in a crowded theatre. It is doubtful that the Founding Fathers envisioned a time when over 30,000 people are dying from gun violence a year, when high-power military-style weapons like AK-47′s with 30-round magazines are available on the streets, when an 14-year-old can take his father’s guns and mow down his classmates, or when parents leave a loaded pistol around and a two-year-old can easily fire it. The vast majority of the American people support reasonable gun control laws and view them as necessary to reduce the level of gun violence in this country. The framers of the Constitution would surely agree.

    In spite of extensive recent discussion and much legislative action with respect to regulation of the purchase, possession, and transportation of firearms, as well as proposals to substantially curtail ownership of firearms, there is no definitive resolution by the courts of just what right the Second Amendment protects. Special interest groups continues to generate tremendous support for individual right to keep and bear arms while claiming that no Article of the Bill of Rights is more important to the preservation of human liberties. They have succeeded in making the Second Amendment one of the most controversial legal issues in this country. As a result, the United States remains today as only nation whose citizens can still, to a broad extent, exercise the right to keep and bear arms. This right has cost the United States dearly in lives of persons killed by the disaffected, the unstable and the emotionally ill.

    • Jim Dandy

      That was a whole lot of text for being behind the times.

      DC V Heller established the second amendment as an individual right. They also “limited” the arms protected by that right as those “in common use for a lawful purpose”.

      • Richard W.

        “In common use for a lawful purpose.” So…like protecting ones self and family? Great! The right to bear arms still allows you to carry a gun to protect yourself from criminals. If you proceed to tell me that it is unlawful to protect my life from another who is trying to take it from me then you will be wrong.

        • Jim Dandy

          Yup. Self defense. Plinking at Tin cans, competition shooting at Camp Perry or Fort Benning. I was just commenting that the long winded post ahead of mine was inaccurate and out of date.

    • Jenn Chandler

      After that long winded anti gun response, I have to ask…. do you support the NDAA, patriot act, TSA, DHS, NSA and the rest of the alphabet soup gang that are crapping on our constitution?

    • Claire McIlvain

      The Federalist Papers tell what the founders meant in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/six-about-2nd.htm.: “militia” clause emphasizes the individual right to keep and bear arms by explaining one of its most important purposes. The militia clause does not limit the right. The style of legal writing in the 1700′s used ‘preambles’ or examples of what was meant by the ensuing statements.

      Article I, Section 8, clauses 15 and 16 Congress cannot “govern” the militias right out of existence and thereby disarm “the people.”

      Also, in the papers it is clearly stated that the people had an INDIVIDUAL right to bear arms The Second Amendment refers to “the right of the people” (not the state) as a pre-existing right that government must respect.

      Sadly, The Federalist Papers are all too often disregarded. Citizens should read them to know and understand the Constitutiion..

    • bobfairlane

      The Constitution is over-rated, but I’m sure in the eventual new one it won’t need an amendment to protect the right of Americans to defend themselves with personal weapons on their persons .

    • knightindullarmor

      can you read? “the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” not the right of the state. the right of the PEOPLE.

  • Jim S Stump

    Fire arm, there are all kinds of fire arms. Some need a permit to carry, some do not. The story does not say what it was.

    • DannoDISQ

      I have been asking to see the original PC affidavit of the man arrested by the deputy, but apparently it doesn’t exist. It would figure that some of Meggs’ relatives live in Liberty County. All other Sheriffs in the 2nd Judicial Circuit better watch out for Crazed Eyes Meggs. He IS THE LAW & nobody better question that !!!!! He’s is heavily touched presently. Should retire asap.

  • KrisAnne Hall

    Thanks for bringing this story, but not exclusive. We have been covering this since day one. Here is the facts behind the case:
    http://www.krisannehall.com/index.php/blog/95-fl-sheriff-arrested-by-governor-scott-for-defending-right-to-bear-arms
    Sheriff Finch was given a plea deal by the State Attorney that if he would resign from office, the charges would be dropped. Sheriff Finch refused. We took this case to the governor directly and asked him WHY he was proceeding with this. When the State Attorney was confronted by the Governor’s office with the facts that we presented, the State Attorney was FURIOUS! He called Sheriff Finch’s attorney and told him that all deals were off and that he was “declaring war” on Sheriff Finch!
    As can be seen in the evidence presented in the link above, this action against Sheriff Finch is entirely political as there is NO support to the criminal charges. I have practiced law in Florida for over a decade and in criminal law most of that time. The facts presented are from an legal perspective, which is why the State Attorney was so angry. What happens to Sheriff Finch will set a precedent for Sheriffs across this country. We stand with Finch now, or watch our Sheriffs fall one by one.

    • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

      Thanks for the additional information.

      • KrisAnne Hall

        More than welcome! Thanks for wanting to be educated. Most will just accept what we see. It is a blessing to see folks who will look into information and educate beyond the “news”.

    • Mikey San

      The facts needed to base an educated opinion is whether the deputy properly made the arrest or not which you didn’t include in your facts. You don’t include the facts of the case and the legal basis with which the state is pursuing it’s case against the sheriff in the first place.

      You haven’t been much help here. You’ve basically simply given opinion in your link and not many facts. So you’ve practiced law? Are you an attorney? The reason I ask is because you’re great at giving opinion but come up short on the facts.

      • http://BlackSheepReport.com/ Richard Penney

        The same hold true for you, Mikey.

      • DannoDISQ

        Her comments seemed very full of FACTS to me. Why doesn’t “…from a legal perspective” make any sense to you ? In other words, no political attacks are going to stand, similarly as Meggs’ attacks against Kathleen Harvey, Rudy Maloy, Trooper Charlie Odom, where no factual basis was ever shown in any of those cases. Meggs’ is very unscrupulous and unfortunately the Governor has fallen prey Meggs’ unlawful crusades of his justice.

    • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

      It appears that you’re not entirely familiar with the power of a County Sheriff. The Sheriff could have merely arrested the State Attorney for threatening and Malfeasance of Office. He also could have merely arrested the officer who tried to arrest him for Unlawful Prosecution. A County Sheriff is the supreme law officer in his county, above the FBI, ATF, State and Local police. The Sheriff still has his powers as he hasn’t been elected out of office. Wake up.

      • KrisAnne Hall

        I am aware Nate. However Sheriff Finch was not.

        • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

          Have you been teaching Jury Nullification? As an attorney this is probably the most powerful tool you have to obtain a Not Guilty verdict for those you represent who have been falsely accused.
          http://www.fija.org
          I am not trying to insult you or your profession. I’m merely continuing to educate attorneys as I’ve done many times in the past. A funny but very truthful concept that I told an attorney to tell the judge that 2+2=6. He did and won the case. We do have fun sometimes, don’t we?
          Best regards,
          Nate
          Retired LEO/Criminal Law Instructor – 23 years.

    • Michael Lotfi

      Our interview was exclusive. Not the story, which is obviously not exclusive to us since there is a video from another news station in the article.

  • Free White American

    All friends and family go to http://www.fija.org and then start volunteering for Grand Jury and NO BILL this man. After all charges are dropped, put him on the ballot for the New Governor of Florida. I would move to Florida just to vote for him. Honest men have no place in the police department and that proves it.

    • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

      I almost fell off my chair when I read http://www.fija.org. I’ve been preaching Jury Nullification for several years. It’s like pulling teeth to get people to study our most powerful freedom tool.
      I invite you to go to my site http://www.secondamendmentwarrior.com
      Patriotic Infidel – because I’ll never be a muzzy.

      • Jenn Chandler

        Nate, There are 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide.26% of Americans are Muslim. Out of 1.6 billion only around 30,000 are fanatics and radicals. The majority of American Muslims follow and respect the laws of the land. Would you rather they support you or go against you? We already know the government is corrupt, wouldn’t it be wise to rise above the BS and propagated lies of our government and mainstream media and fight together for the benefit of the American citizens?

        Hats off to this Sheriff. Wish we had him in Citrus county, FL. We the People need more honest lawmen like him.

        • Sam

          There are 2.75 million Muslims living in the United States, a majority of whom, 63 percent, are first-generation immigrants. — Pew Research Center. OR .008 not 26%.

        • kenstaff

          Jenn you need to check your facts. You are so far off base on American muslims it is absolutely ridiculous. Are you trying to land a job with NBC?

  • JTO

    The Governor does not have jurisdiction over a Sheriff. The Sheriff can disregard the Governor. The law is the law. I hope someone points this out to the Sheriff.

  • http://trevorsullivan.net/ Trevor Sullivan

    When are people going to arm themselves and deal with justice themselves? It’s time to take away the “power” from the thugs called “police” and “government.”

  • disqus_kQJ5TTzPIo

    Florida law permits the carrying of a loaded firearm in a vehicle without a conceal carry permit. I am wondering what the rest of the facts are here that prompted the Governor to make this decision.

    • Katosen

      Rick Scott doesn’t need facts. In his mind, he is the all supreme ruler of Florida, and what he says, goes. Why the people of Florida have yet to wise up about his communistic, Constitution hating self, I have no idea. I just know I’m glad I don’t live in Florida anymore.

    • Mikey San

      Only if it’s not on your person, encased and not readily accessible – that’s the part of the law you left out… Thanks for the half – info.

  • gksnana

    If he was elected by the people than what gives Gov. Perry the kind of power to have Finch arrested for allowing him to follow the constitution and let this non criminal have a fire arm. Obviously the people elected him because of his politics and ethics. Time to start questioning where the Gov. stands …….. for or against the people and constitution.

    • Cin

      Perry is the governor (unfortunately) of Texas not Florida. You meant Scott right?

      • gksnana

        Yep. My mistake. Thanks.

  • Jimmy Rustle

    It’s Happening

  • Anita G Flippo Hitchcock

    Shame on Scott and the state of Florida for firing this sheriff, and then trying to buy him off? All that are involved in this are pathetic. Constitutional right: To Bear Arms! Just to let the guilty parties know, Karma is a B ****! And Rick Scott, I would say you are probably done……..

  • Marcus L. Woodard

    Stay the course!

  • Larry Dague

    Here is the answer without the expletives. You owe it to your readers to post it: This is just one example of the scary situations that are starting up all over the country. Finch is a Sheriff…no a state supreme court judge…not a federal supreme court judge. But sheriff’s all over the country are blatantly ignoring laws for their own personal observations.

    There are examples of sheriffs who kidnap girls at abortion clinics and take them to evangelic camps to try to talk them out of abortions.

    A sheriff in Kentucky has openly stated he will ignore state gun laws.

    You were elected to uphold the law you ignoramous…not interpret it.

    The law clearly says it is a felony to have the gun…not to have the gun and act in a manner that was not “innocuous”.

    Scarey folks….you are supporting the idea of allowing 300 million people decide their own interpretation of law.

    Wake up.

    • David McCray

      Ummm, have you looked at capitol hill lately? They have been doing the very same to their own agenda for decades now. It is time the citizens of this nation recognize that WE are the ones that control this nations fate, NOT the greedy, self indulged, and self righteous politicians that are currently serving themselves. I see nothing wrong with this or any other sheriff that upholds the supreme law of this nation. That being the Constitution.

    • J Karis

      You are missing the point. If a law is at odds with the constitution, then a decision must be made to follow one and not the other. The constitution is very clear. The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed (regardless of the jurisdiction, federal, state or local). The law infringes on these rights. So, follow the constitution or follow the bad law.

      I think you are looking at things from the wrong perspective. The constitution is there to delegate certain powers and rights to the federal government, powers and rights that begin and end with us as human beings. We give the government rights and powers, not the other way around.

      The government only has power legitimately when it falls inline with the powers we the people gave to it via the constitution. Just because a lawmaker passes a law does not make it a legitimate power of the government.

      The law was at odds with the constitution I’m glad this Sheriff realized that and stood against it.

      • Christopher Stuart

        No, you don’t understand the process. If a law is “unconstitutional”, it’s actually not up to the Sheriff to make a test case out of it unless it perhaps infringes HIS Constitutional Rights. He’s a Sheriff, not a Constitutional scholar.

        The process is a speedy trial (it’s in the Constitution. . .there are parts beyond the Second Amendment). If the person arrested is found guilty, it goes all the way to State Supreme Court. . .then, the US Supreme Court decides if they will hear the case and then make a decision, as appeals are made.

        Can you imagine the chaos if every police officer was deciding what law was Constitutional, for whom, where and when?

        You can’t honestly be asking for that?

        • Mikey San

          “You can’t honestly be asking for that?”

          Yes… they can… and they are. And they think it’s cool. Which is kind of a mysterious hypocrisy to me.

        • RonWillison

          Nobody wants chaos. The problem America and indeed the world faces is there really really are a group of wealthy, ruthless, criminally inclined people that have and are intentionally shredding our Constitution while leaving just enough of it intact to preserve the reason those elected seats they occupy exist in the first place. Because they have betrayed America for personal gain and other reasons they are now fearful of what the result of their treachery is going to bring down upon their sorry behinds. And THAT is the reason why we are even having this discussion in the first place. Do or can you believe that were this around the year 1790 any of the authors of the recent bills passed for SECURITY reasons would have even entertained the idea of presenting The Patriot Act or NDAA nonsense for an up or down vote? They would have been shot on the house floor if they had.

        • ThisPlace IsEvil

          If his oath of office included a provision for upholding the constitution of the United States, and he felt that a local law violated that constitution, then he is legally bound, by his oath of office, to uphold the supreme law of the land. If he ignores it, then he has violated his oath of office.

          HOWEVER, the Sheriff was not protecting the 2nd amendment right. The Sheriff felt there was not enough admissible evidence to book the offender, since the gun evidence was the result of what the Sheriff felt was an illegal stop by the deputy.

        • Chris North

          Not at all…. What I am asking for is discretion and that is exactly what happened here someone used their brain instead of blindly following protocol.

          It is the mentality of ” i dont make the rules I just enforce them” with no room for common sense that is to blame.

          Would you throw someone in a cage who was clearly not a threat to society?

          It is the religion of the state, but this sheriff has a higher moral code. It is refreshing to see someone stand on principle.

        • Houston Retrievers

          Ahhh, so you would hire a wolf to guard your hen house….

          • Christopher Stuart

            No harm, right? He’s one of the good ones, right? Because he’s fighting for “gun toteing”. . .must be good then.

            If that’s not asking a wolf to guard the hen house, I don’t know what is.

          • Bob Loblaw

            Indeed you don’t know what is. Our founding fathers didn’t write the 2nd amendment so they could “tote guns” but so they could defend from tyranny. He’s fighting for the country. It’s neither left or right. It’s American. Tenche Coxe said it well hundreds of years ago.

            “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birth-right of an American… [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.
            –Tenche Coxe, Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

            “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the
            people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might
            pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their
            private arms.”
            — Tench Coxe (1755–1824), writing as “A
            Pennsylvanian,” in “Remarks On The First Part Of The Amendments To The Federal Constitution,” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, p. 2 col. 1

          • Houston Retrievers

            That was completely non-responsive….

        • Houston Retrievers

          Its sad to think that anyone would believe that its okay for the system to rob you blind or even prevent you justice by purposely running up the cost of your defense, dragging it out, stealing more and more of your time and money, all the while they know its on purpose. Every time they stop someone they are conspiring with others to take your rights.

    • Christopher Stuart

      Thanks Larry. The same Libertarians here would rail against Judicial Activism of any kind by the Supreme Court, but somehow if a Sheriff does it in the name of Gun Toteing, well, I’m supposed to not think for myself and believe it’s okay.

      It begs all kinds of questions. What if the fella carrying was black? Hispanic? Would have the good Sheriff been as diligent in getting the charges dismissed? (maybe he was black or hispanic, I don’t know actually).

      Point is you are left to the mercy of the Sheriff’s good will, political views, what side of the bed he woke up on that morning. I mean. . .you know. . .I am old enough and wise enough to know this goes on all the time – bias, prejudiced decisions, etc. . .the problem is now that he was called out onto the carpet for it, I am supposed to rally to the cause because a “Gun Rights/Constitution” flag has been waved?

      Naw. Anyone can wave that flag and I see a lot of waving of it so much anymore, it doesn’t mean much to me.

      • kenstaff

        Christopher try using your liberal brain(if you have one)! Where in the hell did anything about race enter into this case? It is strange how all the liberal a$$holes always have to try and play the old race card to justify their positions! You are absolutely pathetic!

        • Christopher Stuart

          Calm down, Kenstaff.

          I just said it begs the question. . .if you are okay with the Sheriff selectively applying the law here and there, don’t you think that opens it up to problem such as racial discrimination? There’s no evidence the good Sheriff would make that kind of decision (seems like a good enough guy to me). . .but if you empower Sheriffs to selectively enforce, yes, it opens up a problem.

          No?

          Yes, another rabid gun toter with googley eyes screaming and spitting, nothing to worry about here. . .thanks kenstaff for your rabid contribution.

      • RonWillison

        Christopher. There are many reasons why the Framers put the peoples right to keep and bare arms in the number two spot in the constitution. They understood that the second amendment would in the end be the only way to preserve the First amendment. There is nothing in the way of wiggle room in the second amendment. So I would ask you. When you look at everything that has been done to circumvent just about every protection that the Framers put into the Constitution for We The People to enjoy and count on as absolute. How would you feel and think on this issue if some uniforms kicked in your door, hauled you off to some unknown place and denied you every protection that the Patriot Act and treasonous subsets attached to the N.D.A.A have taken from you? No Phone calls, Habeas Corpus, Speedy trial, Attorney, Etc? Especially if it turned out that the only reason it happened is because somebody doesn’t like your political views and has invented some trumped up stretched reason to do that to you like “maintaining your lane”..

      • RonWillison

        In answer to your question,”II am supposed to rally to the cause because a “Gun Rights/Constitution” flag has been waved? If your not on board with the One Worlder Statists. YES.

      • Houston Retrievers

        Wow first you play up to logic and reason as a way to get a reader to notice, then you slam the country, constitution and all of us that know we have the right to be left alone. Im guessing its a failed attempt at margenalizing logic and reason by ending your statement with sarcasm that would force the mind to revert back to its illogical child like state, and make it acceptable. Smart but ignorant.

        • Christopher Stuart

          No, I am slamming the way the “Constitutionalists” wave that banner every time they don’t get something they want politically. Don’t play indignant patriot with me. It’s akin to the Bible Thumpers quoting the bible every time a gay crosses their path the wrong way, or how women can’t serve in the church or whatever.

          I am not a fundamentalist with the Constitution if that’s what you are looking for. Heck, I even think it should be updated now and then.

          Is it at least possible that this sheriff acted inappropriately, with bias, and his superiors called him on it? Or is your mind made up?

          • Houston Retrievers

            It is unlikely in my opinion, that he took a position that you are suggesting, not impossible, but unlikely. It is more likely that the Sheriff decided to intervene because what was happening was unlawful, or is your mind already made up? No officer of the law or public official has a duty to enforce unconstitutional laws and if it was not for the fiat currency we have, most of this would not be happening at all. Everyone in the local state and federal governments are acting as debt collectors for the debt they imposed on the rest of us by way of spreading global government masked as support and help via war, drugs, prostitution, child abduction and kidnapping.

            You might say how is that so.. Well it may be a surprise to you but war is not peace, infusing drugs into society, is not anti-drug,

    • Chris North

      larry is a law abiding citizen no matter what the laws are. Killing jews was perfectly legal in nazi Germany. It is the duty of American citizens to violate unjust laws. What about when the law says no citizens can carry guns… are you just gonna pucker up an kiss the states ass?

      • Christopher Stuart

        Again, missing the point. If you feel a revolution is necessary. . .then that’s fine. Pick up your arms and go to the FL Everglades to mount your resistance. Wait and see how many conscripts join your cause.

        What Larry is talking about is the selective enforcement of the law, not the blind adherence to an unjust law. And I think he has a point.

        The law may or may not be just. I’m not sure it’s up to the Good Sheriff to determine that and just say, “Well now. . .we’ll just ignore the law here. . .that ain’t no good.”

        • Jeff Mueller

          I think the issue here wasn’t the gun law, it was the unconstitutional search if you read closely.

        • Houston Retrievers

          Oh so we just keep allowing them to fleece us…

          If someone had the balls and sued the US they would easily be convicted under the RICO act.

    • kenstaff

      You Larry are a moron. The sheriff just as judges and soldiers take an oath to support the Constitution of the United States, the highest law in this land. It is a stated right that your right to bear arms shall not be infringed. Are you too ignorant and illiterate to understand that? Roll over and play dead if you like, but don’t expect the intelligent patriots in this country to follow your cowardly path. A law is not valid or enforcable if it goes against the constitution. Wake up!

      • Christopher Stuart

        Law is valid until challenged and successfully overturned. As far as I know, most, if not all, of our states have gun permit laws. Please read the Constitution (there is more than Amendment 2) and stop disrespecting and waving the “Constitution Flag” every time someone says you can’t bring an ice cream cone in a movie theater.

        I am not a blind follower to anyone who waves it.

        You remind me of the minority who waves the race flag every time something bad happens to them. Do you think people take you MORE serious or LESS serious every time they do that?

        You think you are paying homage to the Constitution when really you are disrespecting it’s meaning and importance and diluting the fact that Consititutional Rights being infringed upon is serious and not be cried about willy-nilly.

        • Phydeux

          The sheriff has the right to quash an arrest if he feels his deputy has acted out of line. Stopping someone for weaving on a decaying road seems out of line. Therefore, the gun becomes evidence he wasn’t entitled to be aware of.

        • Bob Loblaw

          If a law is in direct violation of the Bill Of Rights or the Constitution it is automatically null and void regardless of corrupt judges or criminals that enforce it anyway.

          States’ permit laws directly violate the 2nd amendment. The 10th says that only powers outside of Federal ones are reserved for the states. So, in the case of gay marriage, there is no federal authority to limit it, and any limitations are reserved for the states unless there is an amendment to our highest laws. Similarly, states cannot pass a (valid) law that says they can violate your 4th amendment right to be secure from unwarranted searches/seizures, 1st amendment right to speak freely, etc.

          It is highly dubious to say that federally appointed judges can interpret a law in direct violation of the Constitution or bill Of Rights as constitutional and thus make such a law valid and just as dubious to assert that it’s valid unless they acknowledge it as invalid.

        • Houston Retrievers

          No its not. And the only people they screw with about these laws are people who are weak, ignorant, and poor. That is how they set the precedent of law. But the truth is most of these policies are only enforceable against the people who agree to be bound by them. The court today is a kangaroo court, it operated under color of law which is not law at all. Also the supreme court has ruled that no citizen has to play part in a kangaroo court. It is also unethical and illegal to railroad citizens and go on fishing expeditions into peoples lives. But its okay if they break the law in your mind, just not okay if the rest of us ignore these non-laws…. Wow keep drinking the water…..

          • Christopher Stuart

            Houston, you sound like a pamphlet of recruitment for some right wing paramilitary group and you are accusing me of drinking the Kool-Aid?. . .well, who knows. . .maybe I am. . .I think the glass of fluid in your hand is just a different color of Kool-Aid, that’s all.

            Look, this guy seems pretty decent. . .I can keep an open mind about it. . .I haven’t convicted him,

            It’s just that, unlike you, I haven’t raised him to the status of some hero of the Constitution. With all the Constitutional flag waving you do lately, it means nothing any more.

            Everyone denied scratching their butt in public is crying the Constitution nowadays.

          • Houston Retrievers

            Your response just shows your ignorance and lack of principle and moral conviction. Nothing I said has anything to do with right wing militia however if you want to go down that road, last time I checked it was all of the traitors of the last 100 years who have actually established standing armies you call the police, dhs, doj, which oneday should all come DOA.

          • Christopher Stuart

            I sense no moral conviction from you either Houston. . .

            A. You don’t post you real name therefore, you absolutely have no moral convictions as far as I am concerned.
            B. You parrot rhetoric about conspiracies about standing armies, kangaroo courts, and general societal decay but aren’t really active other than spouting off on a libertarian website.

            There’s more to being a citizen than owning and carrying a gun, Houston. And that’s just it. . .all I hear from the gun toters are cries about their rights, but never anything about responsibility or duty, which have become punchlines since, oh, I dunno, about the Hippie era, where it became fashionable to challenge government on everything.

            The Government could be against brain cancer and guess what the Libertarians would say? “I’m for brain cancer.” And I voted for Ron Paul in the last primary, Houston. So my criticism comes from someone “Within” rather than an “elite, government expansive” liberal. (whatever that is)

            What about Duty To Carry? Like jury duty, citizens could be called to carry to protect their community, act as police extenders? I’m not interested in carrying but if it were for my country and community, I’d do it, go through training and serve. What about a “community armory” so more heavy arms like the one Adam Lanza used are kept under lock and key, away from burglars or bat chit crazy schizo sons? That way if Obama decided to parade around in army fatigues in a jeep waving at his “beloved people” like you say is happening, a call to arms to fight “gov’t tyranny” (because God knows, I want Jimmy Boy Billy Bob to take on Apache helicopters and the best and most lethat fighting force every assembled) can be mounted within 30 minutes?

            Nah. . .like Obama/Bush cellphone users. . .it’s about your rights. Never duty or citizenship.

            Look I don’t want to be overly hard on this guy. . .I could sit on this jury and keep an open mind and listen to both sides. I haven’t convicted him, but I haven’t exonerated him either. I want to hear the state’s case against him and the defense’s case.

            You, however, could not keep an open mind. You think he’s a hero. Whatever, Houston. You may have the last word.

            But your dismissed from the jury because of obvious bias. . .

        • kenstaff

          You need to go stick your head back in the sand where it belongs. You are too stupid to live in a free country! Better go somewhere a dictator can run every aspect of your life and do all your thinking for you!

    • Rick

      Well, Larry. There’s a problem here. The problem is that a peace officer has to interpret laws in order to do his job. There’s no judge standing behing him to tell him whether what evidence he has meets “probable cause” or not. He has to make the decision himself, and then maybe be second guessed by a judge or overzealous prosecutor sitting in a comfy chair days later. An unconstitutronal “law” is no law at all. It’s an unconstitutional enactment that is null and void, not binding on anyone to obey or enforce. Sheriff Finch knows that. The deputy who made the “arrest” aparently does not care about the Constitution, and according to the press about his many complaints for violating rights, does not take his oath seriously.

    • glockstr

      Larry, I suggest you research a term called “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree”. the Sheriff upheld the law. Not only was the Sheriff protecting the citizen as he should he was also protecting the Deputy and his department from a lawsuit which in turn protects the taxpayer who would have paid the settlement.

    • RonWillison

      Larry.. If you have been paying attention to current events recently. You should have noticed high up elected officials making statement to the press like. Assange or Manning should be assassinated for giving to the media information about unlawful government activities that the perpetrators didn’t want known. Those same scallywags are the people that have authored and perfected into law the UNLAWFUL unAmerican and unconstitutional nonsense that is the root cause of this discussion. They can’t have it both ways. You can’t write and pass laws that abridge the first and second amendments without public discourse, the time needed to explore such matters and a vote. When legislation reaches the house floors for an up or down vote 5 minutes before the vote is scheduled. And the issues are as important as the first and second that is at best incompetence. And at worst probable grounds for an investigation into motives and effects. Today it was reported that a company providing email encryption services.was shuttered by its owner because the owner decided he couldn’t go support the NSA invasion of privacy policy’s. He was immediately threatened with possible charges by a govt. attorney named Trump. Invasion of privacy is a FELONY, Intimidation, threats and extorting somebody to break the law are FELONIES. Are you beginning to understand the delema?

    • knightindullarmor

      the law clearly states ‘shall not be infringed’. any law which says it is a felony to have the gun is in violation of the constitution. the same constitution which gives the government it’s validity and it’s charter to exist. if the law you seem to support is valid, then the constitution is not valid and if the constitution is not valid, then the government is not valid. simple logic. constitution trumps any and all other laws.

    • Houston Retrievers

      Um the so called laws you are referring to are not laws if they are not in compliance to the constitution. Also, they are the way they are because someone decided to re-interpret them in a way that served their ideas and interest. Yet in your mind its okay for someone else to do it as long as its in your interest, but for the people that want us to get back to principle, logic and reason, well they are cooky, unstable, potential terrorist. You are as retarded as the people you sponsor.

  • SlimJim

    Not to be too picky, but this is hardly exclusive and in this information age (particularly for the type of reader that would financially support Ben Swann), I would consider this old news. I would have hoped for a report of an update such as RINO Rick Scott being recalled (if FL law provides for that) or all charges being dropped and Sheriff Finch being reinstated. But alas, just reporting on funds raised for his defense. I hope for too much perhaps.

    • Bob Loblaw

      Perhaps you weren’t paying attention but it was the interview that was “exclusive”.

      It reads
      “Below is our exclusive interview with Sheriff Finch:”

      • SlimJim

        There is really nothing substantially new or exclusive. I’m not trying get into a debate on this. Just a cursory lookup… From June 8: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/constitution/item/15658-exclusive-interview-with-liberty-co-sheriff-nick-finch-i-will-never-back-down

        My problem is the bullet line that came in my email said: Exclusive: FL Sheriff Arrested, Charged With Felony & Suspended For Protecting Citizens’ 2nd Amendment Rights. The title for the web post said that also and dated August 19.

        So I’m thinking, hell Rick Scott is really getting pressure from the feds or is just an idiot (likely both) until I read into the first paragraph that it’s an old story. That’s my gripe. But in the process of searching for my post, I read a few more of yours (sorry, just skimmed them). I question your motives.

        • Bob Loblaw

          My motives? What question do you have about my motives? Your being anal about something trivial as a headline’s wording is just sad. You’re acting like they were deceptive by the wording of the headline as though the fact it’s an old story makes the interview less exclusive.

          Do you want them to just say “Exclusive Interview with Sheriff who’s name nobody recognizes”? So they worded the headline too poorly for your taste. So you assumed it was a new story. As I see it, that’s your problem, not theirs.

          • SlimJim

            Bob, my choice of an ending was poor. I offer my apologies for that.

            You did, however, point out the gist of my original post. I like the Internet to be free. It is a rare occasion where I will pony up the money for something. I like Ben and his previous work and despite my financial woes, I did the Kickstarter thing and then followed through with PayPal.

            You’re right, also, in that I am perhaps being anal about this. Sorry, won’t apologise for who I am. I am generally a pretty easy-going guy. The last few years have taken a toll on me when it comes to corruption, brutality, politicians of all ilk. That apology is sincere. Peace.

          • Bob Loblaw

            No, I apologize if I seem like a dick. We’re on the same team here. I just had to share my own two cents and sometimes they can be a bit abrasive. ;)

    • RonWillison

      SlimJim in a perfect world people have the attention span to remember things longer than two minutes. Sometimes events are important and pertinent enough to be rehashed over and over and over again. .

      • SlimJim

        I agree. I had hoped that Ben Swann and his audience would have raised the bar. That’s what I got used to on his Fox19(?) You Tube channel. Maybe it’s because I don’t watch TV, especially the talking heads, that I can focus on what interests me. I’m not claiming anything special. I knew that it had happened and in June knew quite a bit about it. If there was a 2nd sheriff in FL arrested in similar fashion, that would have been news and would have warranted the headline.

        • RonWillison

          Slim. I gave awy my TV 4 years ago. The best thing I ever did for myself. It took less than 30 days for me to realize that I had made it home on payday twice without feeling the need to stop and buy something I didn’t need. That was an amazing revelation.

    • Michael Lotfi

      The story is not exclusive. As there is a video from another news station already linked into the piece. The interview is exclusive.

  • carlos

    Florida just seems to make headlines for all the wrong reasons.

  • Rodney Andregg

    Hang in there and fight these sons of bitches then make them reinstsate you with all Back pay !!!!!

  • kenstaff

    Welcome to your new Nazi Amerika!!!

    • Yukidongo

      You should have seen the police arrest quiet, passive Impeach Obama Over pass people standing on a sidewalk. They tole them to leave. They refused to leave, and were arrested. When they asked why he didn’t give them an answer. They asked on what grounds, since their rights were being violated, they were being arrested. several times. Fact is, you cannot be stopped without probable cause, and you can’t be arrested without an “articulable charge”. This was in Missouri. I am sure the video is on Youtube. Mazi Fscist Socialists, in line with the Islamists–just like Hitler was.

    • guestapo

      oddly we were even lied to in history classes and through all media in every way about that subject. Even the diary of anne frank has been exposed as fraud. Nazi germany was more like the old republic we once thrived with, and hitler more comparable to JFK if you can believe that. Though I’m sure almost no one can, or will do enough research to actually acknowledge the reality. The Nazi party rebuilt a crumbling society and brought its citizens out of the shadows of the neo-con banksters, so the bankers declared war on germany. Watch David Cole tour Auschwitz sometime on zio-leaning youtube sometime for a truth pill.

      • Korz53

        liar.

      • Zee L Usay

        And the bankers erected the camps and fueled the ovens. Assholes like you are the reason we repeat history so often. Yes the Nazi party rebuilt the German economy. They did it by building the greatest war machine and the infrastructure to support it. Of course it is like that great bit bull puppy you raise that is great right up to where it rips your throat out.

        Your sir are a small minded,short sighted idiot spewing incomplete, incorrect history.

        The short version: You sir, are an ass.

      • kenstaff

        You are an absolute certifiable idiot!

  • Alex yerxa

    dirty

  • Mark Robert

    This is why our 2nd amendment right to bear arms is so important; law-abiding
    citizens must have the right to protect themselves from roving bands of gun
    toting criminals who have shown a blatant disregard for the laws, rules and
    traditions of their host societies. Gun restriction laws only serve to take
    guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens. Criminals don’t obey the laws and
    therefore they will always have guns.

    Everyone is well aware that there are no go zones for Europeans; the only deterrent that keeps the chimps from invading our areas is a well-armed citizenry.

  • Kevin Merck

    This is a good man and I’ll be making a small donation for his defense.

    Sherriff Mack is also a very good man and his organization is growing because it’s the right time for law abiding Sheriffs to make this stand.

    No one *lawfully* needs a permit to carry a firearm. It’s illegal to impose restrictions on the second amendment or any of the amendments for that matter. We have let the states ride roughshod over our, God given, Constitutionally protected rights, for far too long.

    People commenting here who claim to be Libertarians or Republicans, who think this Sherriff was out of line are absolute morons who deserve to live under unremitting tyranny.

    Please go live like that somewhere else and stop trying to drag the people who deserve to live here down with your immoral, ignorant selves.

  • Robo

    Where do I donate to the legal fund?

    • Korz53

      Hope he has a good Union or county residents. The citizens that elected him better protect their government or be subject to a King!

    • Kevin Merck

      Here is one link.

      You can also do it on facebook. (If you’re into that) He has quite a few “likes” already
      .
      Sherriff Mack’s website should have a way, but I couldn’t find it.

      https://fundrazr.com/campaigns/5Xbfe

    • Bob Loblaw

      If you can READ, you’ll notice that toward the end of the article the words “defense fund” are hyper-linked to the CSPOA donation page http://cspoa.org/cspoa-supports-sheriff-finch-in-florida/

      • Long gunner .357

        Can’t read so what should we do?

        • Bob Loblaw

          Go to the local library, ask for a copy of “Curious George” and get the librarian to help you read it and teach you what consonants and vowels are.

  • Albert

    If I understand the papers right, Mr. Parrish is a convicted felon, therefore forfeiting his 2nd admin. right, if this is correct then the sheriff was wrong in letting Mr. Parrish off, unless he has his rights reinstated by the Governer.

    • Korz53

      “Finch released Parrish because, in his assessment, Parrish was not a violent criminal and was acting innocuously”.

      Sheriff is elected ! and is to be impeached by the voters ! not mutinied from office!! ( The people are the LAW! in the office of Sheriff in that county or any county because the people are the government! The Governor is only the servant of that government the people of a state ).

      Sheriffs are not appointed; they are elected! Sheriffs can not be dismissed by the Governor; Sheriffs are impeached by the voters or replaced by a new duly elected Sheriff!!

    • Bob Loblaw

      Where does the Constitution or Bill of Rights say that if you commit a crime that we will not respect and protect these God-given rights?

    • Kevin Merck

      Back in the day, you would have your guns taken from you, if you were convicted of a crime, and would have *your property – your guns*, returned to you upon your release.
      The only way they can lawfully take any of your rights permanently is to put you to death for your crime.
      What you perceive to be the law is only a fiction. Your rights are unalienable and cannot be taken away from you by the government.

    • Fed up

      We NEVER forfeit our constitutional rights! Some asshole legislators, judges, prosecutors and such have taken it upon themselves to TELL us we can no longer possess but then, who the hell do they think they are? I will never forfeit or recognize their self proclaimed capacity to force me to surrender my right to bare arms. It is they that we need to bare arms against due to their corrupt, power mongering ways.
      In response to your remark, I didn’t see anything that said he was ever convicted of anything, only that the charge would have resulted in a felony charge/conviction.

    • Patriot1

      There’s nothing in the Constitution about it being illegal for a convicted felon to possess firearms. It doesn’t say “The right of the people, except for convicted felons, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed,” it says the “Right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Period. Any “law” which is contradictory to this is null and void. It used to be that once a man got out of prison, he was considered to have paid his debt to society and his rights were fully restored, including the right to keep and bear arms. Somewhere along the way the law was corrupted and perverted by criminals in government. This Parrish guy, convicted felon or not, committed no crime, so therefore the sheriff did the right thing. It’s the crooked deputy and the criminal governor who committed the crimes and need to be prosecuted.

  • Korz53

    Sheriffs are not appointed; they are elected! Sheriffs can not be dismissed by the Governor; Sheriffs are impeached by the voters or replaced by a new duly elected Sheriff!!

  • Korz53

    S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S ….

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dA-mFTgjHgk

  • Korz53

    S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S …. S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S – S.O.S ….

    http://rlv.zcache.com/sos_distress_american_flag_t_shirts-rbf9674a746e2410e88a675744008d15f_804gs_512.jpg

  • linlin

    We need more people like him who will protect our CONSTITUTION. He should get a medal not be arrested. Thank you and I hope all the other officers stand with you. If they don’t then they are spineless lackeys and not worth the time of day. Carry your guns.

  • Klaatu Fabrice Aquinas

    Unless a governor appoints a Sheriff in his state, the governor has no dismissal power over the county/parish sheriff. (Most [if any] are not.) Elected officials can only be voted out of office, or impeached like elected judges. Show me the law in FA where the Governor has authority to do so.

    I seriously doubt such power exists. In fact, the county sheriff is the Chief Constitutional Law Enforcement Officer of his county. Only the U.S. Attorney General (for the Executive Branch) outranks him via the U.S. Marshall’s office, and only with “due cause.” (That sheriff better be an exo-being or something) Most sheriff’s don’t comprehend the power they possess.

    The Sheriff can tell the FBI or CIA (whatever alphabet) to go take a hike. I think historically, a certain percentage of the people of the county must petition the U.S. Attorney General, for the U.S. Marshall (office) to act in their stead. The State Police have no authority. Not the State Attorney General, nor the Governor. No military general has authority over a sheriff, except maybe in time of congressional declared war, where martial law may be imposed in that county.

    The Rule of Law is so convoluted now, that no one knows for sure what is what. What is the Law, what is not. The Constitution and Federalism is in terminal state. Not dead just yet, but we are very close. Like 2 cents away from the full value of the dollar. (or FRN, whatever you like) …

    • Bob Loblaw

      Well said. When he’s acquitted he should take legal action against Governor Scott and get his job as Sheriff back by whatever legal means possible.

    • MK

      Way to go. It’s good to see someone has a clue. The Sheriff is responsible for the Peace and Safety of the County. Period.

      • Houston Retrievers

        They are trying to get rid of the office of Sheriff because it does not answer to them like corporate municipal cops. Everything they are doing is to give themselves more power and authority where the people will suffer unimaginably by military style thugs if they resist their communist ideas.

  • linlin

    Governor Scot can not legally call for the arrest or removal of any Sheriff. So Governor Scot should be arrested for FALSE ARREST. How about that?

  • Constitutional Barbie

    Funny, all over Corruptshine, they bully, threaten, & try to run you into hiding or jail you when THEY DON’T HAVE A CASE. MORE SHOULD be as this Man!!! What most need to understand, this goes beyond just the 2nd Amendment~take one, they all disappear.

  • Invictus_Lux

    I am VERY confused. Florida DOES NOT REQUIRE you to have a permit to carry a weapon in your car.

    • Mikey San

      No…unless it’s on your person in the car… but it does require that the weapon be encased and not readily accessible.

      • Heartland Patriot

        Is that Florida law? Several other states allow a loaded weapon to be in the vehicle and accessible, no permit required. The vehicle is considered an extension of one’s home in some respects, that being one of them. The details and limits vary from state to state, but once again, many states allow this. I’d like to know whether Florida does or not.

      • Houston Retrievers

        How is one able to bear it if its in the trunk?

        • Houston Retrievers

          Excuse me criminal, will you please allow me to enter the rear of my vehicle so I may get my firearm, so you cant do this to me?

    • Bob Loblaw

      Yes, but he was a felon. The sheriff is challenging the invalid laws that are used to violate the 2nd amendment if you have committed certain crimes. To keep it in perspective, you can have a pound of grass and be completely non-violent, get convicted of a felony, and then you can’t vote or own a gun according to these invalid laws even if you’ve never touched a gun in your life.

      This is a serious problem. They could pass a law saying that all cars must be driven roboticly and have federal authorization to go to your destination. Then, if driving your own car without authorization is a felony, once convicted you would not be able to carry a gun or vote simply for driving your own car.

      • albert

        I agree this is a stupid law, if you have a non-violent offence, you shouldn’t have your gun rights revoked, but it is a Florida law and as sherriff you take a oath to uphold the constitution and the laws of Florida, there are other ways to fight stupid laws besides ignoring them.

        • Bob Loblaw

          Actually jury nullification, sheriff nullification, and 10th amendment (states’ rights) nullification are the last resort really, but they are a vital part of the law. The “other ways” to fight stupid laws like going to the Supreme Court which is appointed rather than elected etc. are increasingly less of an option as corruption takes hold.

          This is precisely why juries have the DUTY and authority to judge the law itself as well and say that “Yes, the man did what he is accused of, but we find the law to be invalid, and thus find the defendant not guilty”.

          • Albert

            Correct, he should of been arrested for violating F.S. 790.23 then a jury of his peers should find him not guilty for being a stupid law, enough of this done is the only way to have this law repealed, but the sherriff should not just refuse to follow it, but what he done may bring it into the light, regretfully at his own expense.

          • Bob Loblaw

            Unfortunately juries are often instructed not to judge the law, and judges even refuse to accept the Constitution being entered into the proceedings. Sheriff nullification is one of the places where the “rubber meets the road” so to speak. So I think as does the CSPOA that all sheriffs not only have the right but the duty to do this.

          • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

            Obama being the highest authority of the Country is not and does not uphold the laws, just to
            name a few, Obama come straight out and said he refuses to enforce DOMA
            even though he took an oath to defend the laws, he picks and chooses
            which ones he will enforce. Other laws Obama violates and/or fails to
            uphold is immigration laws. Other laws he has violated are the laws of
            war acts without congressional approval. Obama’s reasoning is that in his
            opinion they are unconstitutional. In this Sheriffs case, Hes was
            upholding the law. The constitution supersedes any other law including State law, if a law
            abridges a constitutional right, then it is unconstitutional, plain and
            simple.

          • logick2 .

            Corporate Revenue agents!

          • Annabelle

            again, where does it say that Parrish was a felon?

          • Bob Loblaw

            The story doesn’t say it. Someone else commenting said he was a felon and this was why the officer arrested him for having a firearm. I’ve no idea if that’s the case.

          • logick2 .

            “No free man shall be disbarred the right to bear arms.” Are we free, or are we slaves of the Corporate USA? If we are free, get off your knees and defend liberty and freedom. If you are a slave, then

            rattle your chains and say “yazzah, boss.”

          • Houston Retrievers

            He has a duty to uphold the law. If he knows the law, which is the only way to uphold it, he has a duty to uphold it. He obviously knows the 2nd amendment. The route you wish for people to take is the route that is causing all of this to begin with. These parasites have become grossly enriched by the ignorant fearful, where they have allowed for way to long to justify a means to their own end at the expense of everyone else, while they call it civil.

            Nothing is civil about racketeering and extortion, which is what the courts and governments are engaged in, against its own people.

          • Houston Retrievers

            They cant anyways. Even people who are stopped for DUI should not be put in jail if they are not acting in a way that would cause them to suspect they may be a danger to themselves or others if released. This is why the cops get in your face, act all aggressive. They are attempting to get you to move out of a peaceful place where they can justify, if you ever question it, why you were arrested. You cant just go around arresting people in order to fill the coffers of the city federal or state governments. There has to be a remedy offered, where it is not accepted, for their to be a contradiction which requires an intervention by a judge. They have to get you all emotional and upset where they are justified under the limits of the constitution, to protect the general welfare of other people. Even that is stretching it because it says promote the general welfare not create and establish your own version of it.

        • Houston Retrievers

          No you dont… You just opened up your statement that way to get some emotionally backing. The truth is rights cannot be revoked, only suspended while you are incarcerated. Once released, as natural rights, they are back in effect where they can be exercised. How would you get to a voting booth if in jail? Or have access to a gun? Or do anything other than what your captors wish of you.

      • daddycrc

        NO here does it say he was a convicted felon. What he would have been charged with was a 3rd degree felony. READ the whole story before you open your uninformed trap. Your just another liberal thinks that anyone with a gun is a crook. I’m a gun owner and I do NOT have any permits for any of my guns. NOR will I ever.
        They will get my guns when they pry them from my cold dead hands.
        hen guns are outlawed I’ll become a OUTLAW.

        • Bob Loblaw

          It was stated by another commenter that the man was a felon and this is the reason he’s not allowed to have a firearm. I read the whole story and have been following it since it happened. I did not say he was ALLEGEDLY a felon because of what the story says, but what a commenter stated.

          I’m not “a liberal”. I’m a firm believer in the Constitution and Bill Of Rights. I was a delegate to the Texas state republican convention in 2012, (the largest political gathering in the world) in support of Ron Paul. Both Romney and Obama’s #1 campaign contributor was Goldman Sachs according to the Federal Election Comission so I don’t believe they are left or right. They’re fascist. Ron Paul wasn’t an option on the ballot. This is why I voted for Gary Johnson.

          • David Wayne

            The that made the comment you quoted was wrong. why do you keep pushing that it is right to quote someone who was uninformed in the first place?

          • Bob Loblaw

            The that made what? I never “pushed” anything about “quoting someone who was uninformed”, or about it being right or wrong to state what people have said in defense of the offending deputy.

            I simply said that this is why they’re(NOT the article) saying he was arrested, and even then, the 2nd amendment is absolute and unconditional (unalienable).

            Why do illiterate people open their mouths?

        • Houston Retrievers

          They already are in their minds, they just havnt figured out the exact recipe needed to get people all excited and emotionally hyped up where they get the energy they need to move the pieces on the game to make it a reality. They are desperate when they stage events like sandy hook. You all should really be asking why is it that they are so interested in disarming everyone……….

      • Patriot Lady

        The way read it, he was not a convicted felon. Only if he was convicted of carrying a firearm without would he then be convicted of a 3rd degree felony.

        • Patriot Lady

          I should have proof read. It should have said, The way I read it, he was not a convicted felon. Only if he was convicted of carrying a firearm without a permit would he then be convicted of a 3rd degree felony.

          • Bob Loblaw

            I only say “allegedly a felon” because a commenter said this and you need no permit to have a gun in FL. Either way, “shall not be infringed” is not followed by “unless” or “except” etc.

      • Houston Retrievers

        Here is another one that is a talking head. Voting rights are re-established when you get off paper/out of prison. Besides, rights can only be suspended if the man is no longer free, meaning incarcerated. Once he is released his rights are and should be recognized. The only sensible law I would support is where someone commits a crime, as defined by law, not statue, with a weapon. Which can only be classified as such if it is being used in the offensive position.

  • albert

    Florida statute 790.23 bars anyone convicted of a felony in florida or U.S. federal court from possession or control of a firearm. If a felon is found in possession of a firearm he is guilty of a second degree felony and can face up to 15 years in prison and up to $10,000 in fines if convicted.

    • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

      Since you seem to like to recite laws, care to recite another law? Widely referred to as the 2nd Amendment, if you are unfamiliar with it, it can be found in the “Bill of Rights” also referred to as the supreme law of the land. If you are further unfamiliar with or confused of the word “abridged”, seek a dictionary.

      • albert

        Yes I am a believer in the 2nd admin. but the sheriff also took an oath to uphold the laws of the state of Florida, no matter how dumb he thinks they are, But mr parrish had a prior record, he was a convicted felon, and in the state of florida is not allowed to be in possession of a firearm, if the sheriff had a problem with any of floridas laws he shouldn’t have accepted the position, I too think this law needs to be repealed, but that’s not up to me

        • Heartland Patriot

          Where does it state that Parrish was PREVIOUSLY a felon? Or that he was CONVICTED of the charge against him?

          • Bob Loblaw

            He didn’t say the article said that. (Although I disagree with the statement)

        • Houston Retrievers

          He cant uphold a statue that is in contradiction to the law….. No more than HOA’s can establish their own rules if they are in violation of the spirit and letter of the states constitution, which has to be synonymous to the federal constitution. Sure they can write them, paper does not fight back, but to do so simply as a way to bilk the citizens of their hard earned debt is scandalous and wrong.

        • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

          While I can appreciate you point about taking an Oath to uphold laws, When we have a President as well as a Attorney General who has are of the highest authorities whom have equally taken Oaths to uphold laws yet refuse to do so. Some of these laws are in reference to Obama and Holders open and publicly recorded comment by which they refuse to enforce DOMA because they “felt” it was unconstitutional, now that they have managed to appoint a mostly homosexual panel of justices, of course they will find it unconstitutional one way or another. Other examples of failure to uphold laws on immigration laws as well as war powers law by which Obama has sent troops into foreign Countries without congressional approval. Not making excuses for this Sheriff, but my point here is, How can one condemn a sheriff for failure to uphold a law and expect a sheriff to enforce all laws when his examples of the highest authorities don’t. People give Obama and Holder a pass on failure of duty, but hold a county sheriff fully responsible for not enforcing a law.

          As far as your statement that Mr. Parrish had a prior is beyond me, I read the article twice and either missed it or you have read it somewhere else but I didn’t see in this article where it stated that Parrish had a prior felony. As far as what is defined as felonies goes in the State of Florida, Though I don’t know all the laws a quick search shows that Florida considers possession of marijuanna a felony yet in other States it is perfectly legal not just to possess but to consume, other felonies Florida considers are writing bad checks over the amount of $150. Neither of these acts harm public safety or in anyway indicate that the person convicted of said charges are a threat to public safety or would irresponsibly misuse a firearm. Write a bad check for $200 and lose your right to defend yourself or your family life forever.

          Authorities on all levels whether it be the President, AG, judges, magistrates, sheriffs, state patrols, DHS, etc use their position of authority at their discretion as to how and when and to what extent to apply and enforce the law these days.

          If your going to hold a County sheriff to such a standard, certainly I would think you would hold a President and a AG to a much higher Standard.

          Also , you Stated that if the Sheriff had a problem with any of Florida’s laws, he shouldn’t have accepted the position. All the while you have a President who has a problem with a magnitude of laws in this Country in which he has no intentions on enforcing and in fact he has even stated that the supreme law of the land, the Constitution is a old and outdated document of laws. If he didn’t agree with said referenced laws and had a problem with the constitution or immigration laws or DOMA or any of the other laws, then he shouldn’t have accepted the position, but he did and has abused his position of authority. What example is he setting for any other law enforcer in this nation?

    • Annabelle

      Where does it say that Parrish was a felon? He was detained (arrested) but not booked or been found guilty. So, being arrested without being charged with a crime is the same as being guilty? I don’t want to live in your reality.

    • Patriot Lady

      Parrish wasn’t a felon, the charge the deputy tried to pin on him~if convicted is a 3rd degree felony.

    • Hans Eisenman

      Parrish was being honest and answering the deputy’s question. That should have resulted in a warning and a note in the guy’s file. There was no reason not to give the guy a second chance.

      • Houston Retrievers

        There should have been no note or warning as there was no cause to arrest. He has the right not the privilege of being armed.

        The 2nd amendment is not soley about militias protecting the state or you defending your home, it is about the individual right to defend ones self from an attack be it by thugs in red or blue or cronies calling themselves goverment. It really does not matter if the person attacking justifies his/her actions based on the opinion of self appointed gods.

        If the law itself is in violation of the highest law of the land, it is not law, it is treason.

        • DannoDISQ

          I have yet to see the charging document against Parrish. Where can that be found ?

    • Houston Retrievers

      The statue is not law and is in contradiction to the law and is wholly without effect and is beatable and would hold true at the supreme court level. The recent supreme court decisions around the 2nd amendment confirm that as well. All these individuals you refer to as “felons” as if they are in a club or are part of gang or group, which is what you need them to fall under socially in order to have any jurisdiction, have the same individual rights as other individual United States citizens, if not that in and of itself is a civil law suit, mind you, that you would have to do yourself cause there are no lawyers who will stand up for whats right only those who are okay with destroying the last 800 years of progress for man and liberty. Those rights were only suspended by law as they were no longer free men. When they get out all of their rights should be fully recognized and respected. And there is plenty of history to sponsor and support it as well as law. They will never bring someone to the federal level that knows their stuff because it will set the precedent that would open pandoras box. They simply do not want people to feel empowered and free, it does not serve their interest of empowering themselves at our expense where they cannot feel like they have some power. The only power they have is the ability to manipulate the mind of child like people who are simply ignorant of the cause/path they have been asked to take in life by someone who is cunningly evil.

  • gitarzan57

    Another reason not to live in Florida: No Jobs, abuse of whites and attacks by the leftists. Governor Snott should be place a bid D behind his title.

    • paul revere

      That’s the exact reason I moved away from FL. The state has become a cesspool of unemployment, and social dependency and all of the crime and ignorance that goes along with it. What Florida is right now is a great indicator of what the rest of the country will look like in 10 years if these criminals have their way. And make no mistake about it, they are Criminals.

      • Hans Eisenman

        Let’s not generalize too much folks. The crims are actually a minority. But they make so much trouble that it appears as if they are everywhere.

        • jeffersonian

          I have to disagree, If you are with someone who is committing a crime and are complicit with the commission of that crime, you can be arrested, charged, and convicted of that crime, or at least as an accessory. The officers who violate their oaths that we hear about constantly rarely act alone, there are usually other officers present. It stands to reason then, that those officers present that do nothing to stop the criminal activity of their fellow officers are just as guilty as the particular officer committing the crime.

          • Hans Eisenman

            “Who is ‘they?’”, is what I’m saying.

            We need to be specific because generalizing about it, as easy as it is to do, doesn’t actually improve anything.

            Only specific problems and people can be actually addressed to a resolution of some kind.

            Generalizing the issue with statements proposing the entire state is full of nothing but criminals doesn’t actually open the door to any kind of a finite solution.

            You say “the officers”.. Which ones specifically?

            I agree with what you say about accomplices, though. I’m only suggesting that it’s not the entire state. It’s specific people.

            By identifying them and getting those specific individuals out of the picture, the overall scene improves markedly.

            The first person I’m putting on the list personally is Gov. Scott.

            If you have specific names of people who should be added to that list, I’d be interested to know hear who and why.

    • Irish1025

      For the record….there is NO difference between Republican or Democrat they are opposite sides of the same coin. If we want America with all our freedoms back. 1st repent 2) round up each and every muslim in America and deport them along w/ everyone NOT here legally 3) try Obama and 99% of DC for treason along w/ drag queen Michelle! 4) Close down every government agency that is NOT provided for in Constitution 5) and last but not least reform state government and set up very harsh penaltys for breaking ANY Constitutional law! This way we can “scare” the liberals from breaking any of our laws, 1 last thought how’s about a very very thorough back ground check on Any and everyone that plans to run for office and campaign finance reforms that way the CORPORATIONS are not calling the shots? just my thoughts!

  • Paul Revere

    Shame on Rick Scott, His name official goes on the peoples “Red List” for crimes against the American People. This list is growing and the people will not forget…

  • John Birch

    Why are you defending a sheriff who failed to uphold the law? He violated his oath when he decided with prejudice not to allow charges to be filed. The driver/felon was clearly in violation of the law, and that isn’t even disputed anywhere in the story.

    • paul revere

      why are you a troll? As sheriff he has the right to decide if a crime as been committed in his county, these are powers given to him by the people that elected him. He clearly felt that no crime was committed and thus elected not to file charges. So answer this? Why would a sheriff with an impeccable record be arrested and charged with felonies for doing his job, if this was not politically motivated? When drug informants and members of politicians families are allowed to walk from charges all the time and nothing is ever said about it? Get real man and wake up.

    • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

      Same reason you make excuses for Obama not upholding the laws, just to name a few, Obama come straight out and said he refuses to enforce DOMA even though he took an oath to defend the laws, he picks and chooses which ones he will enforce. Other laws Obama violates and/or fails to uphold is immigration laws. Other laws he has violated are the laws of war acts without congressional approval.

      • Bob Loblaw

        Nobody’s making excuses for Obama or Bush’s not upholding the law.

    • Hans Eisenman

      I’m glad he didn’t arrest the guy. What we need more than robotic following of the endless streams of laws in this country is a return to using judgement for a change.

      Lawmen using judgement trumps mindless law following in my book, even if it leads to the occasional mistake.

      Laws do not make people more human. Being human does.

    • tipical

      John Birch Society member, Be Clear and state what law you think he failed to uphold. Was it a city law or a county law or even a State law. keep in mind even the Federal law was not broken. The only Document you should be concerned about is the US Constitution, Primarily the 2nd Amendment. Why are so many people supporting him, is it just because he is right and the Deputy can still be charge in a criminal court. Overstepping your authority does not end when you resign in disgrace.

    • ACIDRAz

      ummm you dont need a license to take your fire arm from your home to a range. or from one private residence to another, you only need a license to carry! that means in public. it is not against the law to drive with a gun in your car unloaded, and clips and or shells in another location (trunk) Florida will try to arrest you for everything, if you have too much money in your pocket you have possibly dealt drugs, if you have an expired drivers license and drive (felony) and Rick scott or dick scott has investments in the florida penal system which is privatized. it also has recently changed the title of the prisons to detention centers….if you understand law, you can be placed in a detention center indefinitely without a charge or trial….everyone should be aware of this in their own state!

      • Houston Retrievers

        You don’t need a license to carry, a license is permission and is a direct infringement on the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. Just because someone is carrying a gun does not mean they are or intend to use it in a violent manner, if that is the case then why are cops armed…. You just dont want people to arm themselves where you will have no choice but face the facts that the system is broken; morally, financially and spiritually, which is going to eventually give cause for the people to abolish it and create a new one, after the blood finally stops running. And I want to see the vote roll cause I know only homos minorities and woman voted for anything like that,you know all the people statist decided would be useful tools in establishing a new order that would destroy the old one….. If their was an actual vote at all. You only need permission to do things on other peoples property, from the holders in due course, not people who want to feel important and build cities around its subjects. Last time I checked the land within the continent known as America, belongs to all of us and no one has anymore right on it then anyone else. and the US only to the posterity of those who founded it. As one of them, I have more right and authority than Obama. The only reason he gets away with this stuff is because he plays the race card, the conspiracy card, the violent card, the blah you people are so stupid you will believe anything I say card……. Not to mention he has autobots and drones working for him.

    • Houston Retrievers

      The law is in violation of its self moron. He upheld the law and shot down communistic rules. Good for him! The charges were invalid and bogus. Heres a clue, lets all give land away so people will come take it, and lets let them call themselves free men so they can settle it under the spirit of such, and as they begin to enjoy it lets start taxing it until we just own it all again, at no personal expense or blood of our own…. Whos in?

      • Houston Retrievers

        Its what they did with alcohol, drugs, cigs, all sins for that matter.

  • Jim Metcalf

    Here you have a deputy with several complaints against him for overstepping his authority. The question is if he had a legitimate cause for stopping Mr. Parrish in the first place. Without probable cause, the deputy had no right to detain the man and there should not have been an arrest.

    • Houston Retrievers

      That does not matter when you need to steal from people…..

  • ded2me

    Now you know why Sheriffs and Deputies are afraid to do the right thing. When you do the right thing you are punished. This case does not surprise me. I have seen things just as bad if not worse. If he had been a bobble head yes man this would have never happened. Sounds like the statist authoritarians in that county are in total control. This is a scary thought. Anyone who lives there beware and be sure to vote out all the terrible oath breakers next election cycle.

  • Charles Rogers

    Now this is really messed up. I´m suing the sheriff of Cobb County for identity theft and he is still sheriff when this sheriff did not see a crime committed and was arrested by the governor for protecting the Constitution. Well I see now where Georgia is considered the most corrupt state of the federation. So that makes Cobb County the most corrupt county in the nation. 2+2=4 lol. Good Luck Mr Finch. Say a prayer for Neil Warren. He had an awful automobile accident so I´m praying for his recovery so I can continue my suit against him as sheriff. Lol. Lynn Turner did not act alone in the murder of Cobb Police Sgt Glenn Turner. Mike Archer and David Dunkerton failed to state that they helped Lynn get rid of Glenn. All documentaries Deadly Women, Snapped and Final Witness combined with what I saw September 21, 1991 that started a string of murders committed by members the Rat Pack of the 4th Precinct of the Cobb County Police Department. 1991 store clerk employed at Conoco gas station formerly located across from Sprayberry High School now listed as unidentified remains off of Shufflegrit Road on the GBI website and her friend in 1992 Bridget Clodfelter who also hung out at the same bar as the store clerk. OCCUPY COBB COUNTY starts September 21, 2013 unless I change the date on craigslist.

  • THOMAS MCFARLAND

    Can YOU read the writing on the wall? Get ready–get prepared. God help us.

  • Uploading Liberty

    Interesting case. The fact that the Governor got involved so quickly and took those kind of drastic actions is quite concerning to say the least. This isn’t the first time the Governor has gotten involved in a case so fast. Remember, Scott fired the initial prosecuting attorney in the Zimmerman case when there was political pressure put on, but not enough evidence deemed necessary by a multitude of both law enforcement and attorney’s. Of course, there was still a not guilty verdict handed down so it was all for nothing. It did manage to ruin Zimmerman’s life, but hey, that’s just collateral damage for a politician.

  • Charles

    THIS HAS TURNED INTO A FIGHT BETWEEN THE SHERIFF AND EX DEPUTY. SHERIFF FINCH NEEDS TO REINSTATE THE INVESTIGATION AGAINST THE EX DEPUTY AND HAVE HIM INDICTED FOR THE VARIOUS RIGHTS VIOLATIONS AND OTHER OFFENSES. HE HAD TO KNOW HE WAS IN BIG TROUBLE OR HE WOULD NOT HAVE RESIGNED. THE GOVERNOR needs to be investigated too to see his connection to the ex deputy. Something stinks in this part of Fla.!

  • Juan M. Gil

    that law is unconstitutional, the sheriff swore an oath to uphold the
    Constitution which includes the bill of rights (as they are amendments
    to the constitution.)

    the Constitution has the highest authority, and
    since the law *needing a permit* infringes on the 2nd Amendment

    *The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed*

    he has a duty to not uphold the law that goes against it.

    see 9th and 10th Amendments to see esp. 9th in this situation.

    let me put these here for your convenience

    Amendment IX

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
    construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

    Amendment X
    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.

    try and interpret these keeping in mind that they were written to protect the people NOT the government or any corporations.

    good luck

    oh, i forgot, the right of the People trump the rights of a CORPORATION *all caps for legal reasons*

    ok, now i’m done

    • TJ

      You forgot the part where it says A Well Regulated Militia, Being Necessary To The Security Of a Free State…..is he part of a Militia? Either way, he has the gun illegally since he has no permit. He should have been charged.

      • Tannim

        Go read 10 USC 311 and get back to us after you pass basic JHS English and learn what a subject and verb of a sentence are.

        • Houston Retrievers

          Ha, how about subject and citizen…..

      • Rebelrocker

        Hey Mental Midget Juan,

        the Constitution has the highest authority, and
        since the law *needing a permit* infringes on the 2nd Amendment

        *The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall NOT be infringed*

      • Sally_Oh

        You forgot the part where it says “shall not be infringed.” And using your logic, Rosa Parks should have been arrested.

        • Houston Retrievers

          Exactly, and all homosexuals in all states who have laws on the books against sodomy should be rounded up right lefty?

          • Sally_Oh

            Chill, Houston. You misunderstand me. Arresting all homosexuals would be like arresting Rosa Parks. There are too many laws on the books, we all commit an estimated 3 felonies every day. If is our duty to disobey illegal, immoral and unconstitutional laws. Highest praise for Sheriff Finch.

      • Bob Loblaw

        Nobody forgot, you just misunderstand the meaning. Any U.S. citizen that arms themselves to protect their country are part of the U.S. militia as defined by our nation’s founders.

        “Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the BIRTH-RIGHT of an American… (i.e. all Americans)

        [T]he unlimited power of the sword is NOT in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the PEOPLE.”

        -Tenche Coxe
        Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.

        “As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, THE PEOPLE are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their PRIVATE arms.”

        — Tench Coxe (1755–1824), writing as “A Pennsylvanian,” in “Remarks On The First Part Of The Amendments To The Federal Constitution,” in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789, p. 2 col. 1

      • Ohio9

        The police are not required to make an arrest when they catch someone breaking the law. Officers use discresion all the time if they determine that the person broke the law by accident and his actions were harmless.

        Since the police are not required to arrest anyone, simply declining an arrest is not misconduct.

        • Margie R Woodham

          AND this man was way down in the National Forest and dog-gone right I would want a gun with me if I came upon something (we have snakes, alligators etc.) to contend with.

      • Houston Retrievers

        When someone is free, when does it become a requirement to ask for permission?

      • BambiB

        Actually, the militia, as defined in the Militia Act (forget the year, but it’s been the law for a LOOOONG time), defines the “militia” as “all able-bodied men between the ages of 18 and 45″. Of course, today, you can’t keep the women out, and there are 55-year-old men who would beat you to death if you tried to tell them they’re too old to be in the militia.

        And that “well-regulated”part? That’s “well-regulated” as in “precise”, or “effective” – as in a “well-regulated” clock. Not “well-regulated” like “buried under hundreds of tons of laws”.

        • TJ

          You are defining it by what you want it to say and not it’s actual intent. This is what happens when you speak with emotions without the benefit of intellect.

    • Miranda Grant

      In compliance with the Constitution I agree there was a right to have the weapon but how the state law reads is that there is no “open carry” inside a motor vehicle. You either have to possess a CCW or secure the weapon inside the glove box or trunk. So it may be possible the deputy did nothing wrong and the Sheriff is jockeying for political position.

  • Hans Eisenman

    I have a question on this story. How is it that the governor can have the Sheriff arrested? Is there a statute for that? The Sheriff is an elected official. Doesn’t that mean he would have to be impeached?

    • Tannim

      Depending on the state, the only one who can legitimately arrest a sheriff is the Coroner. Not sure about Florida, though.

    • Houston Retrievers

      Exactly. Its not about this Sheriff, its about setting a precedent where they can just arrest Sheriffs, who are the highest elected authority in the land. Cops are not of the Sheriff’s department they are communist. Its a nonsense story to get people talking about things they want them talking about so they can see if they can get away with it or if the people by way of silence, consent. I say down with all the municipalities, and corporate cops. We need and want our public servants back whose sole objective is to protect and serve, not police, round up, assault and murder.

      • Joseph C. Carbone III

        Impressively said…

  • barry1817

    once you are told that he you resign we will drop the charges, there is no case and it is a political witch hunt. Either the Sheriff was wrong or he wasn’t, stepping down and not being charged would be very wrong.

  • Bobby Jones

    Thank You Sheriff for standing up for the Constitution. We need more people in power to do the same. Liberals are with Obama and his executive Orders are taking away the rights of Americans and handing them to the Muslims. I have no problem with religious groups, as long as they respect the rights of people. I mean any religious group that beheads people as a protest and wife beatings are all conman with Muslims, I would like to see some students fresh out of law school in 2013, not just one but the whole group, working to turn these executive Orders on Obama’s head with LAW Suites in the trillions of dollars. My thought that Obama needs to feel the pressure on all sides that the walls are closing in on him. He has not done one thing for America, all his Presidency has been do arm The Muslim world with finance and weapons that will be used on America and Israel. Israel Stand strong. I would rather have the Government of Chicago in control as Obama, on the drug cartel. That way we would know what they stand for..Even the Government of Michigan as Obama….

  • Kayci

    is there somewhere I can donate money to help your family?

    • Bob Loblaw

      Read the article. Toward the end it has a hyper-link to the CSPOA defense fund.

      “They have set up a defense fund for Finch”

  • mike hunt

    People need to understand the 2nd amendment a tad better. Also research and read the “dick Act”.

  • Shelan

    So, the synopsis would be: Deputy pulls over guy for driving out of the lane, on a road that is so awful that even the Sheriff can’t drive correctly on it. (Although, If it’s that dangerous maybe it should be closed). Guy in car goes “Hey, officer, look at me, I’m doing something illegal!” Deputy arrests guy. Sheriff is somehow (How?) informed the Deputy is correctly doing his job (ie arresting someone breaking the law) and has it stopped. Then the Sheriff files against Deputy and Deputy quits. Deputy files against Sheriff. Governor comes in and arrests Sheriff for something he didn’t even do.

    Wow. And I live in Florida. Hmmm.

    The ONLY correct action in this mess was the first arrest. Everything else in this seems like posturing. The Sheriff, the Governor, the initial pull over.

    And what is with the dude not having a permit? No one said he can’t have a gun, he just needs a paper that shows he isn’t insane. Oh, and knows how to use it. (Includes things like what not to point at). If you need a license to drive a car that might hurt someone accidentally, it’s good to have one for something that hurts things on purpose.

    It is very easy to get. Just pull out your DD214 and hand them less money than the gun probably cost. TADA. Oh wait, no DD214. You can take a class for $35. (But seriously, I gotta DD214 and I’m a grrrrl.) It’s just discharge papers showing you served your country. Military wise.

    I feel for the Sheriff, but I wonder if he even bothered to hold onto the guy’s gun until he gets his permit.

    Also some info for the DickAct
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/guns/dickact.asp

    • Joseph C. Carbone III

      Dear Sheran, if I understand things correctly, the Constitution, Second Amendment, does not give us permission to bear arms, but is a law against the government from attempting to seize a natural, inalienable right.

      Sincerely, Joseph secret Carbone III; 20 August 2013

      • GARY

        you know what?, interpretation is one,s opinion but the truth of what someone is saying lays in what they really said not in what you THINK THEY SAID!!!!!! WE AS AMERICAN CITIZEN DO HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS AND ANOUTHER THING WE THE PEOPLE DONT WORK FOR GOVERMENT BUT THEY DO DRAW A TAX DOLL
        OR PAY CHECK MEANING THEY DO WORK FOR US TO PROTECT AND TO UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION THAT WAS PUT INTO PLACE IN ORDER TO PROTECT WHO,S BEST INTREST??????? OURS!!!!!!! i am so tired of people changeing the truth for a lie, the amendments all tie togeather inorder to give us our freedoms!!!!!

        • Joseph C. Carbone III

          Dear Gary,

          It is good to hear from you. We do not need permission for what is already established, but we are being defrauded into believing this is true.

          The Second Amendment is a law against the government from infringing upon our rights, but if the Second Amendment did not exist, the founders believed the right is inalienable, inherent to humans.

          The Second Amendment is a law against the government not permission for the people. One cannot give what is already owned, but it can be stolen. The Second Amendment is a law against the theft of our rights as human beings.

          Sincerely, Joseph C. Carbone III; 20 August 2013

    • Keet Hensley

      Ref: Gov. Scott Fires Sheriff…

      And what did you determine was the illegal act to make the arrest? As stated previously, you may have a firearm in your vehicle as long as it takes 2 moves to get it ready to fire. It was not put into the article anything about the gun not being properly secured. I agree the deputy needed to consult with the sheriff before making his judgement call unless it was about a loaded gun sitting on the seat next to the driver and not in a snapped holster.

      As for the Governor he cannot have a LEO that has been arrested representing the Law.

      Now as for the POS States Atty. Typically they over exaggerate their position when it comes to the dispensing of the Law. Just look at the GZ case for example, the State gave in to Racial tension to prosecute the victim that defended himself from a “Suspect” that just happened to be Black and a very large minor. Lawyers love arguments and their vanity compels them to make spectacular cases even if they are totally wrong.

      Good Luck Sheriff, though I am sure that many people have also been falsely prosecuted, and some of those rise to become heroes after the Prosecution is slapped hard in so many of these Florida cases.

      Keet

      >:D<

  • Kieth Brackett

    A well written article designed to incite anger in people who know nothing about the case, but for people who are aware of the many details intentionally left out by the author this article is laughable.

    • john396

      I see you left no details either, so why would your comment be any better!?!?

      • Ron

        Come on Kieth, put up or shut up, what details…..waiting still waiting……….we still here Kieth….

    • DannoDISQ

      Enlighten us with these details sir. I would love to see them, because you apparently have a copy of the PC affidavit/charging documents against Parrish. Do tell.

    • Margie R Woodham

      And just what would that be? You need to specify and enlighten us.

  • gary

    i believe we all have some bad baggage in our closets but this man —-> sherriff acted in what was the right thing to do according to the situation and im sure that he check this man out before letting him go and how come no one is looking into all the complaints that was against the so called officer that 1st made the arrest????? why is all the focas on the sherriff that just made a correct choice???? (corruption) that govenor needs to be fired!!!!!!!! i dont think he knows what he swore to uphold and i believe he is in it for the money and the fame of the postistion and for advancement. the people of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NEED TO WAKE UP AND START FIREING A WHOLE LOT OF ELECTED PEOPLE TO LET THEM KNOW WHO THEY WORK FOR AND TO LET THEM KNOW THAT OUR CONSTITUTION AND LAWS APPLY TO THEM AS WELL, AND THAT THEY ALSO WILL BE FIRED AND GO TO JAIL BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ABOVE THE LAW EITHER!!!!! remember people just because they are in office dont give them the right to break the law!!!!!

  • Josef Roesler

    You don’t have to have a license to carry a gun in your vehicle in Florida.

  • Kevin Merck

    Over 300 comments, but only 1 star.
    Don’t forget to star this discussion :-)
    We need to make supporting people like Sherriff Finch a priority in our lives.

  • Steven

    Mr Lofti, are you a Persian or are you an AMERICAN. You really should pick one and stick with it.

    • Samuel Adams

      Steven, are you a decent guy or an shallow idiot ?

      You really should pick one & stick with it !

      Just kidding – but how’s it feel to be disparaged ?!

      I appreciate the fact that this guy has the decency to point out his background, (despite the fact that some may hate him for it).

      I assume us ‘native-born Americans’ might appreciate one who has apparently chosen the USA self-consciously.

      I take it as a compliment to some of the Virtues that our uniquely American.

      Besides, how many of his readers will know what country was formerly known as Persia, the older title of which calls forth more mystery & fantastical tales of bedouins & moonlight caravans !

      Michael, LORD bless you for showing more respect for the Righteous parts of American Liberty, than many who were born here !

      Keep up the great work for Truth & Liberty…….

      • Heartland Patriot

        Indeed, I think the author points out being “Persian” to show an ethnic heritage versus being “Iranian” which would denote something else entirely.

        • raptor57

          excellent point,it also shows that you don’t have to be a member of duck dynasty to value the constitution

      • DannoDISQ

        @ Samuel Adams — Not necessary to add or comment except that your post was outstanding.

    • Michael Lotfi

      Steven, Persian is an ethnicity. “American”- Is not. I can’t necessarily pick one or the other since that would be like saying pick one of the two fruits: Apple, or Chicken-
      Thanks for reading though!
      -With Liberty

  • https://www.facebook.com/UnifiedMilitiaCommunicationsNetwork Unified Militia

    Time to arrest the Governor for failing to uphold his Oath of Office.

  • maduroman98

    Some of this story is being left out. In Florida it is completely legal to carry a firearm in your car without a permit, it can be fully loaded and ready to roll as long as it is within a secured case (such as your glove box which can even be unlocked). You don’t need a permit to keep it secured as such, you do need a permit to keep it on your body and not face consequences while in your vehicle or off of your own property. So where did this gun owner have his gun? Yes I understand that any law placed upon the 2nd is and should be illegal of itself but good luck arguing that in court when you have felony charges placed against you. Just saying something is missing in this story.

    • DannoDISQ

      I agree. I cannot find the probable cause affidavit anywhere for the arrest of Parrish. Obviously, someone does not want us to see it, and we know FDLE has it !!

      • Teba

        Since driver was not impaired the officer had no probable cause to search and discover the gun.

        • DannoDISQ

          It is beyond any question that the deputy used the badly degraded road as a pretextual traffic stop. The deputy should be de-certified for such habits. Unethical and corrupt. Sheriff Finch even said that he had gone off the road due to potholes, etc. The deputy knew that the road was bad, but intentionally used its condition to stop someone whom he would otherwise have been unable to lawfully stop. I will ask again if anyone has access to the deputy’s PC affidavit for the traffic stop and arrests. Please post if you have it.

  • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

    319 talkers but not one brave enough to become a Warrior or smart enough to study and understand the most powerful tool that we’ve had to protect ourselves from an out-of-control government. So sad. Although I will give you both tools for freedom none of you will use them.
    http://www.secondamendmentwarrior.com
    http://www.fija.org
    Nate
    Patriotic Infidel – because I’ll never be a muzzy.

    • Heartland Patriot

      Talking trash to folks is not the way to influence them in the direction you’d like them to go, if that is indeed what you were looking to do. “not brave enough to become a Warrior”? Do you know the backgrounds of everyone who has posted something on this? Some of them might be combat veterans, for all you know. Looking at your page, I see that you reside in Connecticut, so I can understand you being upset with firearms laws in this nation, and especially your own state, but that still doesn’t justify talking trash like that. I try to reserve the trash talk for liberal-progressives that I’m not going to change the minds of, anyway.

      • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

        What good is trash-talk if you can’t change their minds anyway? I have many special ops/combat veterans who have taken the Pledge. It makes no difference what I or anyone says, you’re either a Warrior or you’re not. One out of the 319 talkers signed up. Like the other 318 probably thought, “he insulted me so I’m not going to commit to freedom and I’m not going to learn freedom’s most powerful tool.” “My sensitivities are crushed and he made me cry.” “If he wants me to fight for freedom he’d better talk to me sweetly.” Vomit. You must overcome all negatives to be one of my Warriors.

  • http://www.youarestupidif.com Nate Tanguay

    We’ve had this tool for over 400 years.

  • HOWARD

    come down here, ill vote for him, this man is a real person. a dying breed in the USA right now. the GOV. scott is a jackass!

    • g.johnon

      jackass is far too nice a word for this pukestain.

  • bungiecord

    this is retarded. Finch should be acquitted of all charges, put back into his rightful position as sheriff, and given the opportunity to punch governor scott in the face repeatedly.

  • CrazyAuntJane

    Politics all the way. The anti-gun crowd couldn’t win the election so they are going to get rid of their opponent by accusing him of something and forcing him to resign!

  • Allan

    Another Patriot shot down by the FASCIST BANKING CARTEL. When one falls another 1000 will take his place. Support those who support freedom. Do not let this man go down. All that TYRANNY needs to succeed is for good people to do nothing. Draw your line in the sand.

  • DannoDISQ

    Does anyone have the PC affidavit for Parrish’s arrest by the deputy ? Please post.

  • Dadelous

    Constitution?! WE DON’T NEED NO STINKIN CONSTITUTIN!!

    • Phil O

      Yeah, we don’t even need to know how to spell either…got it.

  • John Doe

    i live in bay county, our sheriff frank mckeithen, since taking the office of sheriff, has aided in drug running for groups moving drugs in and out of bay county, been involved in at 7 murders including the juvi camp killing, performs illegal search and seizure on a regular basis, and just sort of decides who is or is not following the law on a whim based on who they are to him in doing things such as contaminating evidence, planting evidence, and removing evidence from the scene of a crime….yet somehow this makes the news and people are going after this guy?…all faith in humanity is lost

  • Linda

    Why is Florida such a woos State. The Sheriff has more power than the de facto Fed any day where were the deputies??? WTH?? Guess they wanted to make an example of him for the other states. Let see them do that in Texas.

    • Bob Loblaw

      I’m sure Perry would gladly do it if he thought he could get away with it. The (good) sheriffs left in Texas’ 256 counties are a huge obstacle for the police state. Unfortunately many are just as corrupt, but like Saddam, they still keep the other bad guys from taking over.

      • Phil O.

        Sorry Bob, cite your examples of Perry’s mishandling of any Sheriff related incidents…you can’t…

        • Bob Loblaw

          I said he WOULD if he thought he could get away with it, so obviously there’s no example of something he hasn’t done yet. I didn’t say Perry has ever done such a thing, but that he would. Are you illiterate or drunk or something?

      • jwsays

        Rick Perry is a staunch 2nd amendment advocate Bob. You are most likely incorrect in your guess.

        • Bob Loblaw

          He’s a Bilderberg attendee. He’ll do whatever he’s told and paid to do.

  • United We Stand!

    Sheriff Finch, I praise you for your ability to not ruin someone’s life. This is honestly one of the most commendable things I have seen an elected official doing, instead of getting an award, you get awarded with an arrest. Scott is criminal at best in his actions to this. You ever meet an honest lawyer? We the people need to step up and let Mr. Scott this is unacceptable. Stand in there Sheriff Finch and this will work out for you.

  • Joe Draper

    I just read this, and have to run out, can someone tell me if we have A fund we can donate Money too, for this Patriot.

    • Paul Revere

      Hello,

      Here is another:
      http://www.nickfinchfund.com/

    • Margie R Woodham

      Go to facebook and there are three sites listed:
      Support For Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch

      • Joe Draper

        Thanks guys/gals.

  • G

    How about we take our country back?

  • dwjoae

    How may I contact Finch? I can help him.

    • Nexus

      You can contact him through Facebook or LinkedIn.

      • Margie R Woodham

        Support For Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch

    • Margie R Woodham

      Go to facebook: Support For Liberty County Sheriff Nick Finch

  • Tahni Danielle

    I advise the whole city to gang up on the new hog and give him a hell of run for his undeserved money.

  • Milo Minderbinder

    This is an op-ed piece masquerading as a news article and is a gross distortion of the material presented in the hyperlinked reference story. The article the author cites states that Parrish was arrested for carrying a concealed weapon without a permit and was booked into the jail and that the sheriff destroyed the arrest documents and let him out. Rick Scott had nothing to do with it and the second amendment doesn’t even enter the picture. The sheriff broke the law. And if the rule of law doesn’t matter to you, then what do you need a constitution for?

    • Phil O

      And the sheriff states no arrest documents were written or recorded…the man was being detained…is it a he said/she said argument? As for 2nd amendment citing, the events leading up to the detention are 2nd amendment rights…had it not been for that there would be no arugment…

      • Margie R Woodham

        THREE TIMES IN THE AFFADAVIT IT IS MENTIONED: SHERIFF FINCH IS A SECOND AMMENDMENT SUPPORTER and THAT MAKES IT A SECOND AMMENDMENT ISSUE, DW! IF THE AUDIO WOULD BE RELEASED THEN IT COULD BE PROVEN THAT THE SHERIFF TOLD THE PERSON AT THE JAIL,”PUT HIM IN A HOLDING CELL. DO NOT BOOK HIM.WAIT UNTIL I GET THERE.” BUT WILLLIE MEGGS HAS WITHHELD THEM AND THE VIDEO TAPE and/or DESTROYED THEM WITH CORRUPT INTENT.(this in case you have problem with your eyes, DW).

    • badman400

      Did you not read the article? The man was NOT booked, and therefore there were no legal document TO be destroyed! The Sheriff seems to be the only one in this whole pathetic story that has kept his oath and shown true integrity. The “problem” officer seems to be the true root of the whole mess.

      • LetsTryLibertyAgain

        Exactly! The sheriff is the ultimate law enforcement officer in the county, and has complete discretion in which cases to prosecute or not prosecute. Even if Mr. Parrish had been formally arrested, the sheriff would still be within his right to reverse that decision and correct the error by eliminating the erroneous arrest record, but that’s not what happened. The sheriff intervened before Parrish was booked, and there was no arrest record. All Sheriff Finch did was correct the admitting form in an effort to correct the deputy’s mistake.

        There are bad laws that increasingly make an arrest… ANY arrest, legal or not… tantamount to a conviction. Upon arrest, the subject’s fingerprints are permanently entered into the national database. The arrest record is filed with the national database in Chicago where it’s a public record that is routinely searched whenever someone applies for a job. The power to arrest is being abused. When your bogus arrest is thrown out (after you’ve spent thousands of dollars in legal fees with your lawyer), they let you go and call it justice, but they still have your fingerprints and you still have an arrest record.

        How many times are people arrested for resisting arrest and nothing else? How can that happen? It’s basically the equivalent of being arrested for Contempt Of Cop. Do what I say or I’ll Taser you, hand cuff you, and unleash the power of the corrupt Just Us System on you.

        • DannoDISQ

          It’s called a cover arrest, and SCOTUS has deemed them unconstitutional. As many as 65% of arrests have been found to be cover arrests around certain US jurisdictions. Florida law enforcement is at the top of the list for Contempt of Cop.

    • Teba

      The gun was ‘discovered’ by an illegal search of the vehicle after the officer found the driver to be unimpaired.

    • Margie R Woodham

      If you could read and LISTEN you might learn something.

  • Palmer Eldrich

    this is a pretty massive story. also insane.

  • Alan Williams

    Suspended without pay….funny a sheriff who protects the 2nd amendment is suspended without pay….but officers who are under investigation for beating and shooting innocent civilians are suspended WITH pay…..there is a big contrast here.

  • Ex Floridian

    Is this the same Willie Meggs that, when faced with allegations (of some sort – can’t remember) asked who the alligators were?

    • Margie R Woodham

      I don’t know about alligators, but that sounds like the fool! He has family in Liberty County who, evidently opposed Nick, and he, being so evil, is working his devilish plan to unseat Nick and steal our election. He also knows that Nick opposed his re-election and openly campaigned for his opponent, Pete Williams. Knowing how people feel about willie (intentional lower case letter on his name) he had a choice of winning by hook or crook, so he used BOTH methods.

  • badman400

    Bottom line is that the county Sheriff is the highest ranking law officer, and he could even arrest the Governor if he wanted to do so! But it seems that the Sheriff is the only one in this whole pathetic story who has taken the high road and actually fulfilled his oath! The “problem” officer, that made the arrest sounds like “Percy” in The Green Mile. Why would a Governor allow himself to be used by such a whiner, and the taxpayers’ money and the courts’ time to be manipulated by such a punk. This “officer” should be investigated and dealt with in the most comprehensive legal manner possible. It’s people like this guy, that give all honest cops a bad name. Good for you Sheriff Finch! We The People, the American and the patriot alike are behind you! Let’s all donate to this man of integrity, and post this across America on every social media site, so that Americans know what’s going on. somehow I don’t see this story being told accurately, if at all, by the mainstream media.

  • ConservativeSenior

    The people of Florida need to get this of that POS they call a governor. The Sheriff should sue the governor personally. That man is just a thug.

  • Kevin Merck

    After two days he has 8,885 likes on facebook.
    I thought that was pretty good until I found out that teen idols get millions of likes.
    I guess that should tell us a lot about the future.

  • Joseph Slabaugh

    For those that want to donate to Finch, go to http://www.nickfinchfund.com, thats from the page on fb.

  • Joe Eckstein

    I would arrest Rick Scott next time he steps foot in the county :)

  • ThomasCollins1

    “The events began when Floyd Eugene Parrish, a Florida resident, was
    arrested and detained by one of Finch’s deputies for carrying a firearm
    without a permit on March 8th, 2013.”

    In march, five months ago. How has this turned out? I can guess that the man in question is not a public menace. It is relevant, though, that the sheriff altered logs with white-out. That is never okay. As they say, the cover-up is worse than the original offense.

  • Podunkville

    It is offensive that Slick Willie can bring charges against this decorated war veteran after all that he (Meggs) has been involved in, namely the David Harvey case in Wakulla County FL. I really hope this mess “blows up” in his face and people see him for what he is. Sheriff Finch is a decent man, as far as I can tell, who believes in the constitution and simply wants to do what is right. He looked at Parrish’s situation with compassion and understanding, as he should with every citizen of his county. Good luck Sheriff Finch….looking forward to you coming back to your post soon!

  • jwhitehawke

    The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few…… or the one.

    • g.johnon

      but they must never outweigh the right of the right of the individual to remain sovereign.

  • jwhitehawke

    “What do you fear, lady?” [Aragorn] asked.
    “A cage,” [Éowyn] said. “To stay behind bars, until use and old age accept them, and all chance of doing great deeds is gone beyond recall or desire.”
    ― J.R.R. Tolkien, The Return of the King

  • Mark Denton

    Interesting how his OATH to “uphold the State Laws” is somehow forgotten. Boy can’t wait to go back to the Cracker days of the 1950′s when a Sheriff could decide which laws to apply, which to ignore and who to apply the laws.

    I’m sure this will be resolved, but the issue is at hand is he swore to uphold the laws of the State, period. If he doesn’t like the law and feels anyone should be able to carry an unregistered gun at any time, than he can work to have the law changed.

    • g.johnon

      why work to change something when the law you are working for has been on the books since around 1776?
      swore to uphold the laws of the state, period??!! no mark, he swore to uphold and protect the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.

    • Yode

      Mark Denton
      “….could decide which laws to apply, which to ignore and who to apply the laws.”
      Sounds like the motis operandi of the current POTUS who thinks he’s king.

  • Troy Darling

    so your a cop…why would you offer to take a lie detector test….you and i both know that a lie detector has no validity..its just a scare tool that police use….not to sure about you after you offer something so weak

    • Rob Reiken

      Wrong , he is not a cop, he is a sheriff , theres a big diffrence 340 Sheriffs have been warned by Obama for charges of Treason for standing for 2nd amendment rights . So who do you stand with, it’s simple as this, people having rights? , or Big Criminal Government?

  • Frostiken

    Can anyone actually give a reason this guy should’ve been arrested? They didn’t just hand-wave him through, they went through the motions and determined that his offense was minor and not worth ruining his life over. This is no different than a cop running your license after pulling you over for speeding and making the judgement call to give you a warning and send you on your way.

    • Trev Tastic

      Exactly. Police are able to use their own discretion in any matter. Same as the high profile Zimmerman case. He was not arrested til later after Al Sharpton and his race baiting.

  • adam222green

    Without knowing what really happened, I can’t say, but Finch seems to be honest and reasonable. If there’s no connection between him and the Mr Parrish, and it can be shown that Sheriff Finch had no knowledge of prior crimes by Mr Parrish, and so long as Parrish was not actually arrested and was only detained (thus, no documents could have been destroyed) then I think we can learn two things:

    1. Sheriffs are not above the law and must be held accountable, even under such dubious circumstances. I think Sheriff Finch has already shown he is ready to stand up and be held accountable. But he should also be considered innocent until proven guilty, so the petty act of leave without pay only raises suspicion this is a political attack, not a matter of law.

    2. All law enforcement officers and personnel should be required to pass thorough testing to prove they understand and can uphold the US Constitution and Bill of Rights by the word of the law.

  • gmo2ashes

    Sheriff Finch …one of the few honest men in law enforcement …the snake network destroying America can’t have that.

  • gmo2ashes

    It’s legal in Florida to have a pistol during, or in route to go fishing. You don’t need a permit. Maybe Parrish was on his way to drop a line in a pond.

    • drksilenc

      just keep a rod and reel in your car

      • gmo2ashes

        Good answer … great solution.

      • BillinDetroit

        Or be headed in the general direction of a place that sells them.

  • RageFury

    Your Article does not prove said documents exist or existed, nor does it include Finch’s response to the charge. Both the charge and Finch’s response are contained in this article, had you read it you might have seen that. It is up to the prosecution to prove they existed and if so to prove he acted outside his authority. Neither are clear in this article or yours.

    you can’t claim he’s innocent until it goes to trial and ALL the evidence is presented. If you do, you’re no better than the morons who said OJ was innocent.

    Finch’s response indicates they might not have existed at all. Which means the assumption of Guilt is the incorrect stance to take until the trial is complete, not the reverse. That said, you have it wholefully backwards. You are always innocent until proven Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a Court of Law. Our system does work that way and was never intended to work your way.

  • Diana Stokes

    You can donate for Sheriff Finch’s defense through the Sheriff’s Assoc. This is a stand up man. Do you know how hard that had to be for him? Doing the right thing is not easy, but extremely honorable. Shame on those bastards for putting him through that. How could they, when what he did was right. The bad cops are defended and should be thrown out on their ass, to have an honorable Sheriff like him, seems like the whole city should have shown there support, because there coming to your house next, to take your guns, your rights,throw you in jail, unjustly. Do people understand as Americans, we are losing our freedoms. The whole city should stand shoulder to shoulder and defend each others rights. Like they say freedom isn’t free. If you lose your job for doing what’s right, so be it. injustice is running amuck, stand up now, because they are going to take your job away and send you to the reeducation camps soon.
    So while you have some freedom left, you better stand for each other now, and push back.

    • Joseph C. Carbone III

      Absolutely agreed, minus the cursing…

  • Diana Stokes

    I live in Arizona, and I love our Sheriff Joe Arpiao, ya he is old school, and tough, but Joe is honorable. Seems like integrity and honor comes blessing in your town. Corruption and wickedness curses a community. So What, we should through honor behind bars? This is what’s wrong with America, everything is backwards. We have to turn this madness around before we lose our country!

  • swansend

    This also tells me, the sheriff was about to come face to face, to some really nasty stuff. That deputy has some deep, dark connections…and as far as I’m concerned still needs to be investigated.

  • cyndyt

    One thing those of us that live here in Florida knows, is that from the state capital to the town cops, this has to be the most corrupted state in the 48. I have not researched this case enough to voice an honest opinion, but one of the problems with ‘parties’ of any ideology is they tend to report only the facts that can advance their cause.

  • Michael Langley

    OJ was found innocent by a jury of his peers.

  • Gregg Braddoch

    Some meat to add to this story: Willie Meggs has already faced a lawsuit for corruption, and apparently has been doing this sort of thing for a long time:

    http://segment.com/corrupt-state-attorney-willie-meggs-faces-long-overdue-lawsuit/

  • gatormomof4

    Wow!! I am totally confused!! Our sheriff has been served with a 31-count indictment, 29 felonies and 2 misdemeanors, stayed in office. Gets accused of intimidating witnesses, (judged to be ok because he is just trying to build his defense) and STILL is in office!!!

  • Paul Carelli

    Have we had an endrun around the 2nd amendment http://bit.ly/1aJufPr via @resetliberty #2A #gunrights — PLEASE SHARE! Now is time to buy!

  • Ognol Longo

    Time to destroy that Gov and vet the shit out of him and his family.. Here comes the dirty life of this douche! Get him fellas!

  • James

    I believe that this country has some problem. There is a lot of issues going on. I hope one day we can restore liberty and freedom to this nation. This case is very important case. I just going to wait and see what happens. I hope this guy wins in court.

  • Difster

    Sorry, but I don’t feel sorry for any CopRoach that gets arrested and fired for any reason. Sure, he did a good thing and protected a guy’s 2nd Amendment rights, but how many people has he coerced in to false confessions? How many times has he done nothing about police brutality? How many times has his department, under his direction used “civil asset forfeiture” to pad their coffers when they knew full well no crime was being committed?

    We need more of everyone standing up for the 2nd, but I’m not going to cry over this guy getting his comeuppance.

    • gman68137

      So because he wears a badge he is automatically guilty of high crimes? Yes, some are not good, but I know of several personally who are protectors of civil liberties. Let’s not stereotype…that’s a tactic of the radical left.

      • Difster

        Yes, wearing a badge automatically makes him guilty.

        • BillinDetroit

          You, sir, are an infected armpit on a rabid hyena in heat.

          Hey, that’s at least as true as the mud you sling at this guy who was just put through the wringer for what? For doing the right thing.

          When and where have you had the cajones to stand up for what is right in defense of another human being? Did it threaten to bankrupt your family … kids and all?

    • dawson

      what a disaster of an opinion. had you any decency, you’d be ashamed of yourself. given your words, that’s highly improbably.

      • Difster

        Had you any sense of history or even current events, you’d know my words ring true.

        • BillinDetroit

          I have a very good sense of history … and can recall only too clearly the ante-bellum lynchings of Blacks for presumed infractions and the witch hunts that preceded them. Stand and declare yourself … what is your REAL name?

    • Paul Ferry

      When you are going totally off supposition, you make yourself look like an idiot. Is he guilty of anything that you put forth? Maybe, but then again, maybe not. There are bad cops out there. Until we know to any degree otherwise, we can’t also assume the same about him.

      • Difster

        We can be assured that he has put people in jail for victimless crimes. We can be sure he has stopped people for minor infractions of traffic violations that had no victim and forced them to pay a ransom to the county. We can be assured that he locked people up for “disorderly conduct” merely because he didn’t like their attitudes. We can be assured that he either participated in police brutality or did nothing about it on any number of occasions throughout his career. This is how police are trained. This is what they do every single day.

        • Joe Feenstra

          Dipshit, dipster, what ever,…..your an idiot…..

          • John Ulicky

            *you’re*
            As in: If YOU’RE going to call someone an idiot, be sure not to look like one in the process.

        • Andy

          Who is “we”? You have a chip on your shoulder regarding ALL cops. I have a chip on my shoulder regarding 97% of them, but that only makes me *more* inclined to support the 3% of them who are actually interested in using their office to turn the tide against tyranny. Furthermore, I could probably count on one hand the number of sheriffs in the *entire country* who would risk their jobs for the Bill of Rights.

          Or, you know, you could throw all of them under the bus, and if so, good luck ever getting to a point where law enforcement would understand what victimless crimes are and why there are better things to do with tax money than arrest people smoking pot in a basement.

          I think this has made huge inroads in terms of setting precedents for sheriffs to decide NOT to prosecute every single crime. But for a person who paints with such broad brushes, you seemed to overlooked the bigger picture.

          By the way, what exactly did you sacrifice in this whole chain of events? How many articles were written smearing your name? What unelected bureaucrats were gunning for your job and freedom, while you waited to see if there were just enough individuals left in this country who believe in freedom, to serve on a jury and hopefully find you innocent? You post comments on an internet board that other people of like-mind will read, nod their heads in agreement, and nothing will change.

          • jwhitehawke

            Sheriff: Voted in by the people. All other law: hired or appointed……..

        • BillinDetroit

          He was elected. We can’t be sure he did ANY of those things because you do NOT have to have a law enforcement background to be elected Sheriff.

          So, Spanky, shut it.

    • WesSeid

      In this very article, Sheriff Finch says he wishes the cars had cameras since it may have been an unwarranted stop on that crumbling road.

      Sheriff Finch risked his career and more to do the right thing. If you can’t find something nice to say about Sheriff Finch at this time, then you need to pick your battles better because you’ll never get 100% of what you want, which will lead to getting 0% of what you want.

    • Justsomeguy151

      You don’t know he ever did that. Instead of being a db, be glad he is a Constitution supporting sheriff.

    • BillinDetroit

      In this country we don’t presume guilt and we don’t slander. What country are you from?

  • jason

    So, Obozo and Governor Scott have plenty of money for armored vehicles and tv show type weapons but they can’t afford cameras for the police cars. Scott lied to get elected just like Obozo did. I saw Scott at a rally for him before he was elected preaching the 2nd amendment (among other things), then I saw him again after the election (2 months ago) telling us that all guns in Florida need to be taken to protect us all from, guess who? The imaginary terrorists of course.

  • slamradio

    Bravo, Sherriff, thank you!

  • Brian C. Cole

    Finch was in fact found not guilty, and reinstated to his rightful position as Sheriff of Liberty County yesterday afternoon!

  • jwhitehawke

    In the history of our world, it is government tyranny that has violated the freedoms granted to us by our Creator more than any other. And it is the duty of the sheriff to protect their counties from those that would take away our freedom.

  • Blaser270

    After seeing Megs whitewash Winston’s rape charge there was no doubt in my mind that the guy was corrupt. Seeing it here in writing tells me the Sheriff is the one that was in the right from the beginning. Megs and his family are evidently just what Florida didn’t need in the State Attorney’s office. Then again a certain lawyer from Colorado is fixing to eat Meg’s azz for his cover up.