No products in the cart.


Hood County Sheriff Wants Sanctuary County for Guns

Hood County Sheriff Roger Deeds wants to make one thing very clear: “We’re not going to be messing with the Second Amendment in Hood County.”

Author: Alex Rozier


HOOD COUNTY, Texas — Hood County Sheriff Roger Deeds is moving forward on a “Sanctuary County” proposal that states the Hood County Sheriff’s Office will not enforce any new state or federal gun law that infringes on the right to bear arms.

“People are scared. They don’t want to lose their rights,” Sheriff Deeds said. “They have the right to protect themselves and we’re going to make sure that they keep that right to keep and bear arms and protect themselves.”

Sheriff Deeds says his proposal has strong support from judges and county commissioners. If the proposal goes through it will have to be passed by the Commissioner’s Court of Hood County.

Deeds expects the proposal to go to a vote in early October.

“This is going to end up being an ordinance or a resolution,” he said. “I’ll meet with the county attorney and we’ll see how it needs to exactly read.

“We’re doing this to the legal letter of the law, and that’s why we’re going to meet with the county attorney and make sure we get it spelled out right.”

The proposal comes just weeks after two mass shootings in Texas. After the two tragedies, presidential candidate Beto O’ Rourke said if elected, his administration would confiscate AR 15s and AK 47s.

“That gun didn’t pull its own trigger. It took somebody with a demented mind that was maybe in that mental crisis mode to pull that trigger,” Deeds said. “Here in this part of Texas people don’t take too kindly to others, especially from the federal government, talking about wanting to take away people’s rights, people’s weapons, rifles, pistols.

H/T  R. H.


Attribution:WFAA 8 abc





  1. It is not just understanding the Oath of Office, so many do not even understand our constitutional republic. If one who serves within our government and is Oath bound to it does not bother to read the document, supreme law, supreme contract, how can they follow it, enforce it, support and defend it? How many have even read a pocket US Constitution so to at least have a basic understanding?

    The US Constitution lays out certain things that all who serve within our governments MUST do, and some that they are FORBIDDEN to do. Take the 2nd Amendment, it is telling all who serve within our governments that they have no power/authority over the American people and their weapons, not how many, not what type, nor how they are carried, although with the Militia clauses it is made clear that weapons of war are also required to be had and trained upon by the American people.

    Tench Coxe, Delegate to the Constitutional Convention of 1787: “Who are the militia? are they not ourselves. Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. 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… The 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.”

    What a huge surprise, right? What Tenche Coxe says about who has weapons and who is forbidden them, and it is not the people to whom weapons are forbidden. When can those who serve within our governments have weapons? When the US Congress DECLARES war because America itself has been attacked. That is also the ONLY time that they can send Americans to fight wars.

    James Madison: “… large and permanent military establishments … are FORBIDDEN by the principles of free government, and against the necessity of which the militia were meant to be a constitutional bulwark.”

    The US Constitution is the supreme CONTRACT for all who serve within our governments – state and federal – where its delegated powers are put into writing it is the supreme law. Understand that does not make all legislation created by the US government supreme, only that created by those who actually serve within the House of Reps and within the Senate may create laws/legislation that are binding on the American people. But even then, the only binding legislation they create also has to be “in Pursuance thereof”, follow the US Constitution’s purposes as laid out in writing. Some “law” is “Color of Law”, pretend law, and the only way a governmental servant can know what is actual lawful legislation is to understand where it was created from, and if it is in Pursuance thereof the US Constitution, hence requiring knowledge of what it says.

    Article 5: “… This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. …”

    Pay attention to when the word “all” is used in the US Constitution.
    1. Every one, or the whole number of particulars. … This word signifies then, the whole or entire thing, or all the parts or particulars which compose it …
    The whole; the entire thing; the aggregate amount;
    … A following; prosecution, process or continued exertion to reach or accomplish something; as in pursuance of the main design.

    Cockrum v. State: “The right of a citizen to bear arms, in lawful defense of himself or the State, is absolute. He does not derive it from the State government. It is one of the high powers delegated directly to the citizen, and is excepted out of the general powers of government. A law cannot be passed to infringe upon or impair it, because it is above the law, and independent of the lawmaking power”.

    “Arms restrictions – even concealed weapons bans – are unconstitutional, since arms bearing is an individual right and the legislature may not restrict any aspect of such a right.” Bliss v. Commonwealth

    Nunn vs. State: ‘The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the milita, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right”.

    Andrews v. State explains, this “passage from Story, shows clearly that this right was intended, as we have maintained in this opinion, and was guaranteed to, and to be exercised and enjoyed by the citizen as such, and not by him as a soldier, or in defense solely of his political rights.”

    The Bill of Rights does NOT give the American people their “rights”, instead it requires all of those who serve within our governments to PROTECT those rights, natural and inherited. The Preamble to the Bill of Rights clarifies why the BoR was added to the US Constitution.

    “Preamble to the Bill of Rights: Congress OF THE United States begun and held at the City of New York, on Wednesday the Fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
    THE Conventions of a number of the States having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, IN ORDER TO PREVENT MISCONSTRUCTION OR ABUSE OF ITS POWERS, that FURTHER declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best insure the beneficent ends of its institution.”
    To use ill; to maltreat; to misuse; to use with bad motives or to wrong purposes;
    To pervert the meaning of; to misapply; as to abuse words.
    A corrupt practice or custom, as the abuses of government.
    To help forward; to promote; to advance onward; to forward; hence, to help or assist.
    … Making declaration, clear manifestation, or exhibition; expressive; as, this clause is declaratory of the will of the legislature. The declaratory part of a law, is that which sets forth and defines what is right and what is wrong. A declaratory act, is an act or statute which sets forth more clearly and explains the intention of the legislature in a former act.

    Even the way the US Constitution can be changed is laid out in writing (by amending it), with how the amendment process is to be carried out also described in writing.

    America can only be saved by educating the American people, both those who serve within our governments and those who do not. It covers all things governmental because ALL who serve within our governments – state and federal – are bound by it as the supreme contract, not just the supreme law of this land.

    Daniel Webster: “Where is it written in the Constitution, in what article or section is it contained, that you may take children from their parents and parents from their children, and compel them to fight the battles of any war in which the folly and wickedness of the government may engage itself? Under what concealment has this power lain hidden, which now for the first time comes forth, with a tremendous and baleful aspect, to trample down and destroy the dearest right of personal liberty? Who will show me any Constitutional injunction which makes it the duty of the American people to surrender everything valuable in life, and even life, itself, whenever the purposes of an ambitious and mischievous government may require it? … A free government with an uncontrolled power of military conscription is the most ridiculous and abominable contradiction and nonsense that ever entered into the heads of men”.

    1. A squared away Oath Keepers published ‘oath keeping handbook” is LONG overdue. But good news is I am working on one right now. My self-imposed deadline for it is Bill of Rights Day, December 15, 2019. Wish me luck! I will post it here for comment before it goes to the printers.

      Stewart Rhodes

  2. Exactly! The deep state NWO types want to disarm us… completely. We should be disarming them! Just who are they going to to use their arsenal on? China? Nope.

    All gun laws/ regulations are unconstitutional. Period. Period. Period.

  3. Here here! Sheriff Roger Deeds is doing the peoples work here. This is what is meant by keeping your Oath. Changing minds and perspectives are what Oath Keepers were founded upon, and what can be expected by a national presence with name recognition. This is what the Oath Keepers organization seeks to do. We, at the local level, are then expected to form the local MAGs and tribes of mutual protection. We must talk to our local officials and take the initiative that Rhodes envisioned. Prepare for the worst and long for the best, and congratulate Constitutional thinking.

    So I ask you; what will you do today to uphold and cement the Oath you have taken – to protect and defend the Constitution – to preserve the American way of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.


  4. It’s stupid. His Oath and the Constitutions of Texas and the United States is all he needs. He made this announcement because he is grandstanding and pandering for votes.

    Resolution? Resolution? I don’t need no stinking resolution; I have the CONSTITUTION.

    1. I agree that he doesn’t need a resolution to do the right thing, but the utility of such a resolution is getting the entire political structure of the county united. If he can get all – the judges, the county commissioners – to agree, it puts up a united front. Whenever I draft such a resolution I always point out that their oath to support and defend the Constitution COMPELS them to refuse to enforce, or allow the enforcement, of any act by any level of government that is contrary to the Constitution. But I do think such resolutions, which have been passed in many states, especially out West, have utility.

      Remember, the Founders passed such resolutions (they called them resolves) in the lead up to the American Revolution, to help educate their fellow American colonists, to show they were united, and to send a shot across the bow of the Royal governors, and across the bow of King and Parliament. It mattered. Even though they could not avoid the necessity of fighting for their liberty, such resolves helped to strengthen the patriot cause. Let’s follow their example.

      Stewart Rhodes

  5. Good for Sheriff Deeds. And if the sanctuary passes in Hood County and things hit the fan then those merchants in Hood County will benefit tremendously from the influx provided the trucking and merchandise is still viable. I can’t believe that in the whole state of Texas this would be only the second county with a sanctuary if it passes. Where in the hell is everyone at ???

  6. Where is everyone? Perhaps waiting for a leader such as Sheriff Deeds. Stewart was right about why a resolution can help. In addition, it serves to boost moral for the public, for those of us that have been under fire. It hasn’t just been the politicians working overtime to undermine the Constitutional rights of Americans, there’s the activists and the shady forces behind them, and that’s practically ALL we’ve heard over the last 10 years or so–because of the media which ALSO happens to be on their side. It’s easy to become dispirited and begin to lose hope, when you have such forces working against you. Then…someone steps forward and say, “Enough!” Then someone else does it too, and next thing you know, there’s a tidal wave of people saying, “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!” I’m happy he’s done this, along with all the other sheriffs of late. The federal government has done a real hatchet-job on states’ rights as well as individual rights, so when I see state and local officials standing up, squaring their shoulders and putting their foot down, it gives me hope. Which may be another reason Sheriff Deeds did this–to give his constituents hope.

Leave a Reply