Forums:
There seems to be a big issue about state or local police enforcing federal law. When a police officer takes his oath and the politicians or other public office take a similar oath as dto all attorneys at law, it includes the law, whether it be local, state or federal. Robbing a bank for example is a federal offense. Does that mean local law enforcement authorities are exempt from have to stop or apprehend a bank robber in the commission of the crime. I don't think the answer is yes. The same is true for a kidnapper in the commission of that crime whether he or she takes his victim across state lines and it becomes a federal crime.
There used to be and in some states there is what is called a "citizens arrest". The authority and its limitations vary by state but if citizens can legally make an arrest, even for misdemeanors, why shouldn't the police, who are sworn and authorized to uphold the law be required to as part of their job? Stop and frisk worked very well in the city of New York until the Progressives represented by the ACLU put a stop to it under the guise of Article IV of the Constitution. Where was the ACLU when the authorities began searching and even confiscating personal property at airports?
The law was meant to be applied to everyone equally and enforced fully for it to be effective. We have reached a stage where the authorities are free to select which they shall enforce and which they shall not. That creates a state of lawlessness and makes the authorities susceptible to bribes (the $20 bill hidden in the driver's license) or Al Capone buying judges and police chiefs. A Sage once advised that the politicians should never be allowed to pass a law they were either unprepared to enforce or didn't want to in the first place. We've already passed that milestone and you see the mayhem it has caused.