There are several pieces of gun legislation making their way through the courts right now throughout the country and of course through the Senate and House. Much to the dismay of many sheriffs around the country, these laws encourage, limit, and control the weapons of the American people and law abiding citizens in new and sweeping ways, and they are taking the financial heat if they do not get what they want from these law enforcement officials.

In Colorado, for example, SB197 is being discussed and pushed through the state’s Senate. The result would be increased restrictions on guns sold after July 1st, which one Colorado Sheriff has insisted his disdain for. Sheriff Maketa has asserted that as far as he was concerned, all guns would be seen as purchased before July 1st and felt the restrictions on the citizens of his community were too much. He, along with other sheriffs, have publically spoken about the need to protect not punish law abiding citizens and gun owners.

Shockingly (or not) the sheriffs who are speaking out are being punished. Of course, this is done under the pretense of budgetary restrictions or other more flowery terms but the state of Colorado is quickly tying, allegedly, the salaries of sheriffs to the gun control positions that they take. The tit-for-tat approach is not new to politics, and I readily understand that. However, it is a clear exertion of power over first amendment a right that is a problem in my view. Sheriffs are important to our country, as are any first responders. Their opinions should not be punished, but listened to. These gentlemen and women are not disclosing classified information but are simply telling their position and how they will enforce the laws once they are enacted. To punish them for these opinions is not only frustrating and childish; it is, in my opinion, unconstitutional.