Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. $12 for 12 weeks.
News Opinion Readers Respond

Maryland's 'lawless sheriffs' are upholding our constitutional rights

State Del. Jon S. Cardin's recent commentary on Garrett County Sheriff Robert Corley is full of half truths and lies ("The lawless sheriffs of Maryland," June 17).

Arizona's Sheriff Joe Arpaio is not a laughingstock, and I challenge Delegate Cardin to note where he got that lie from. I searched the web and nowhere is this found except by Jon Cardin.

Sheriff Arpaio was elected to a sixth term last year in Arizona, after having taken strong steps in 2008 to correct past issues, including stopping controversial saturation sweeps that targeted and detained immigrants. The lawsuit the court recently ruled on was initiated in 2007.

Arizona has been at the heart of a bitter national debate over illegal immigration since Republican Gov. Jan Brewer signed a 2010 crackdown on undocumented immigrants that was challenged by the federal government. Mr. Arpaio was following the laws of the U.S Constitution and the state of Arizona in arresting and deporting illegal immigrants

The Maryland sheriffs are following U.S. Constitution and might selectively enforce the new gun laws through the same selective enforcement that keeps Mr. Cardin from getting a speeding ticket when he drives 65 mph in a 55 mph zone.

Take note that the U.S. Supreme Court has let stand a part of the Arizona law that permits police to question people they stop about their immigration status.

I agree with Mr. Cardin that "ignoring the law is a slap in the face to the citizenry and to democracy." That's why Mr. Cardin himself "should be held accountable for his irresponsible and illegal decisions" to enact legislation against the U.S. Constitution and the citizens he swore to represent.

Ralph Grubb-Wheeler, Reisterstown

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Maryland's gun law is working
    Maryland's gun law is working

    The gun lobby's lawsuit against Maryland's life-saving Firearm Safety Act described in Saturday's front page article does not challenge the constitutionality of the key provision of the act — requiring handgun purchasers to first obtain a fingerprint based background check and license...

  • Md. gun law is working [Letter]
    Md. gun law is working [Letter]

    Jack Mccauley's letter belittling the Firearms Safety Act fails to mention the most important parts of the new law — the requirement that handgun purchasers get a fingerprint-based license and the authority for the state police to regulate firearms dealers ("O'Malley, Brown are kidding...

  • Gun law doesn't make Marylanders safer [Letter]
    Gun law doesn't make Marylanders safer [Letter]

    Lt. Gov. Anthony Brown's recent commentary on Maryland's 2013 Firearms Safety Act is disingenuous and deceitful ("Brown: I will enforce gun safety law," Oct. 2).

  • A wasteful death by Uzi [Letter]

    Though I seriously doubt it, I wonder if a gun advocate or a member of National Rifle Association could explain to me why a 9-year-old girl needs weapons training ("An Uzi, a 9-year-old and American exceptionalism," Aug. 31). When I first read about the 9-year-old girl who had accidentally...

  • The city's problem isn't guns, it's gangs [Letter]
    The city's problem isn't guns, it's gangs [Letter]

    While I agree with letter writer Pat Ranney that Baltimore has a serious gun violence problem, she is incorrectly placing blame on an inanimate object. Guns don't pull the trigger, people do ("Baltimore's violence won't end until we stand up to the gun lobby," Aug. 14).

  • Judge's decision on Md. assault weapons ban makes no one safer [Letter]
    Judge's decision on Md. assault weapons ban makes no one safer [Letter]

    U.S. District Judge Catherine Blake's decision upholding Maryland's assault weapons ban isn't a victory for anyone ("A victory for public safety," Aug. 14).

Comments
Loading