Skip to main content

A Sheriff I'd vote for: Mike Winters of Jackson County, Oregon. . . .


. . . who has gone to court to protect the privacy rights of firearms owners from government snooping.

From the Oregon Firearms Federation [with the final paragraph of commentary/info from Smokeless Powder]:

“The Medford Mail Tribune, which has repeatedly editorialized against gun owners' rights, had sought to gain access to all personal information on every license holder in Jackson County. They began seeking this information after learning that teacher Shirley Katz had a CHL and was fighting a school district policy that claimed she gave up her right to self defense when she became a public school employee.

“When the Medford Mail Tribune demanded the private information on license holders (supposedly to find out how many other Jackson County teachers had chl's) Sheriff Winters refused to turn that information over. The Tribune sued, and the same Judge who declared that Katz had no self defense rights ruled that the anti-gun newspaper could have access to gun owners’ personal information.”

Not only is the Katz decision under appeal, but Sheriff Mike Winter’s has appealed the decision of the Court seeking to continue to protect the identities and personal information of gun owners in Jackson County.


So much for the people who say that registering firearms is only for the purpose of tracking down criminals.
Labels:

Comments

Fingolfen said…
Thanks for stopping by my blog! I'm keeping an eye on the situation down in Jackson county. I still don't understand how such an anti-Second publication is thriving in relatively rural Oregon, but there you go...
June 9, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Anonymous said…
You obviously don't know Mike Winters or about Mike Winters. He was elected Sheriff, after buying $$$ the badge. He outspent his only opponent, by many thousands, but it was still close. The man is egotistical & arrogant. So you like his stance on one issue, that isn't why one votes for a Sheriff. The sooner this guy is out of office, the better Southern Oregon will be. Google man Google & learn.
March 29, 2010 at 12:58 AM
Anonymous said…
I do know Mike Winters, and I can tell you, he is one of the most generous, finest men I know. He is honest to the core of his soul and is a tremendous asset to the office he holds.
May 14, 2010 at 12:08 PM
Denise said…
He doesn't protect gun owners rights if they have a LEGAL OMMP card for medical marijuana, for some reason. He's wasting taxpayer $ to fight a cardholder in court so she can't have her handgun. She's broken no laws. So explain that intelligently, please? Your friend is an egotistical horse's ass.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2010/10/southern_oregon_sheriff_appeals_order_to_renew_handgun_permit_of_medical_marijuana_cardholder.html
October 28, 2010 at 5:58 PM
Anonymous said…
Denise... wasn't this a "concealed weapons permit" this gal wanted and was denied? That would certainly make a bit of a difference to your story, now wouldn't it?

Again, I know this man and there is not a more fair, thoughtful and decent man working for the people, anywhere.
February 11, 2011 at 11:06 PM
Anonymous said…
Who ever the Mike-lover is, hasn't spoken to good cop Jake Franklin who was wrongfully fired by the bad Sheriff, the citizens of JacCo, or followed the truth. Winters is a lying sack, from his own debts, land-theft from his family, dead beat dad who doesn't pay child support & had to be taken to court in Cali & Oregon. Has wasted hundreds of thousands in taxpayer monies. Why, maybe the Sheriff lover, is Mike himself,or someone else from creepy Keno quarry. End of his career. Will not be reelected in 2014. Thank God.
January 19, 2014 at 11:08 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more