Jim AT RealCrozetVA.com

Submit A Story

A Quick Thought

Written by

Jim Duncan

In response to a FB comment, I posted:

The focus of RealCrozetVA remains, and will remain, the Crozet community. And yet, we’re at a time in history where silence in the face of what we are seeing across the country is no longer acceptable.

I appreciate the feedback and understand the concern. I get it, I do, and I don’t post this lightly. My intent is not to pivot this community page toward partisan politics, but to highlight a significant shift in our civic landscape that affects the safety and rights of all residents.

This is not “political;” it speaks to fundamental rights of all who inhabit this country, including Crozet and Albemarle.
We are currently seeing documented events that bypass fundamental constitutional protections—specifically our 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 10th Amendments. See citations below.

When federal operations involve the use of lethal force against citizens without due process, including murdering Americans in the streets with no accountability, warrantless entry into private homes, and the arrest of journalists, we are no longer discussing a policy debate. We are discussing the erosion of the legal framework that ensures our community’s stability. Acknowledging these events is a matter of constitutional concern and public safety, which I believe is relevant to us all, regardless of political affiliation.

A Few Relevant News Stories

This FAQ is designed to be a non-partisan, educational resource. By focusing on the text of the Constitution rather than political rhetoric, you position yourself as a civic-minded curator of information rather than a partisan advocate.

Know Your Rights: A Constitutional FAQ for Our Community

In light of recent national events affecting local residents, many have asked how these situations relate to our Bill of Rights. Below is a plain-English guide to the amendments currently being tested in the courts and on our streets.

What is the 1st Amendment?

The Right: Protects freedom of speech, the press, and the right to peacefully assemble.

The Current Stake: When journalists (like Don Lemon or Georgia Fort) are arrested while reporting on public events, it challenges the “Freedom of the Press” clause. A free press is the primary way citizens stay informed about what their government is doing.

What is the 2nd Amendment?

The Right: Protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms for self-defense and security.

The Current Stake: Reports of federal agents confiscating legal firearms from citizens during “checks” or home entries without a criminal conviction raise serious concerns about the infringement of a law-abiding citizen’s right to bear arms.

What is the 4th Amendment?

The Right: Protects you against “unreasonable searches and seizures.” Generally, federal agents cannot enter your home or seize your person without a judicial warrant signed by a judge.

The Current Stake: Recent “warrantless entries” into private residences (such as the case of Scott Thao) are being legally challenged as direct violations of this privacy right.

What is the 5th Amendment?

The Right: Guarantees “Due Process.” No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without a fair legal procedure.

The Current Stake: When a citizen is killed by a government agent (such as Renée Nicole Good) without an immediate, transparent investigation or legal accountability, it bypasses the constitutional requirement for Due Process.

What is the 10th Amendment?

The Right: Reserves all powers not specifically granted to the federal government to the States and the People.

The Current Stake: This protects our local police and city officials from being forced to follow federal orders that contradict state law. When federal “surges” happen without state consent, it is often viewed as a violation of state sovereignty.

What should I do if I am stopped?

If you are approached by federal agents, legal experts generally recommend:

  1. Ask “Am I free to go?” If they say yes, walk away calmly.
  2. State “I do not consent to a search.” This protects your 4th Amendment rights for later court proceedings.
  3. Ask to see a warrant. A “Notice to Appear” or an administrative paper is not a judicial warrant signed by a judge.
  4. Remain Silent. You have a 5th Amendment right to not answer questions about where you were born or how you entered the country.

Subscribe to RealCrozetVA

Roads, schools, new businesses, and the housing questions — from someone who’s covered it since 2005.


    Crozet at a glance.

    Comments

    14 responses to “A Quick Thought”

    1. Rich Pleasants Avatar
      Rich Pleasants

      Jim.. I appreciate you posting this essential information. Many citizens take all these things for granted.. We can’t do that in today’s times. The facts bear that out. The rule of law and due process are critical and not optional.

      Reply
    2. Barry Robertson Avatar
      Barry Robertson

      Thank you! The elimination of Habeas Corpus and Due Process under the law appears to be done with clear intent. I’ve never seen anything like it in my more than 7 decades. Horrifying.

      Reply
    3. Edward Strauss Avatar
      Edward Strauss

      Everybody has their opinions but there should be some common sense. People are willing to give up their lives too easily just for 15 minutes of fame. What laws do we have the right to ignore? If you block the road with your car in Crozet and try to belittle the authorities that come to remove you you will be arrested. If you ignore Police commands and drive towards them you will have a serious problem. If you kick a taillight out of a police car you will be locked up. If you are armed when doing it it will be even worse on you. If you have been an illegal Alien for 20 years in this country you are still illegal. If the Police in Minn. had locked these people up at the start it would of been different. How are Sanctuary cities even possible. Isn’t that one of the causes of the Civil War, States wanting to do whatever they wanted to do? You forget the Supremacy clause that is also in what you write about, easy to ignore. It is easy to cater to the crowd but how far are you willing to go? There is a movement that is growing every day that believes that everyone should have a right to housing, that some people simply have too much. What will you say to them when they arrive at your door. The 60’s were far more turbulent but it seems that people forget that. It is so easy to exaggerate, the sky is not falling and our biggest problem right now has been the weather. But, if you really believe what you write please tell me what laws I can ignore? Taxes maybe?

      Reply
      1. Rich Pleasants Avatar
        Rich Pleasants

        Edward.. Let’s get back to your point(s) about the Supremacy Clause…. However, “Supremacy” applies to the Constitution itself, not to the personal discretion of federal agents.

        The “Supremacy Clause” does not excuse all these ICE agent actions….

        The Constitution is the Supreme Law: Under Article VI, the Constitution—including the 4th and 5th Amendments—is the highest law. When an ICE agent enters a home without a warrant, they are violating the very “Supreme Law” they claim to represent.

        Supremacy vs. Commandeering: The Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled (under the 10th Amendment) that the federal government cannot “commandeer” state and local resources to enforce federal programs. Sanctuary policies aren’t about “ignoring” law; they are about states exercising their own sovereign right to decide how their local police budget and personnel are used.

        Legal Authority requires Legal Process: Federal supremacy doesn’t mean federal agencies can ignore Probable Cause. Even if a federal law is supreme, the method of enforcement must still be constitutional. Breaking into a home or using lethal force without due process isn’t “Supremacy”—it’s a civil rights violation.

        Following the law means following all of it. We can’t pick the Supremacy Clause to justify federal action while ignoring the Bill of Rights to justify how that action is carried out.

        Reply
    4. Rich Pleasants Avatar
      Rich Pleasants

      Edward, I see you are weighing in now. You’ve hit on the big question that’s at the heart of all of this: how do we keep our community orderly and safe without losing the very rights that define us as a country?

      I think the “Constitutional FAQ” posted here suggests that it isn’t really about “ignoring” laws, but rather making sure the government plays by its own rules—the ones laid out in the Bill of Rights. Here’s a way to look at those points from a different angle:

      Standing on the 4th Amendment: When someone asks to see a judicial warrant before letting agents into their house, they aren’t trying to “ignore” the law. They are actually following the law by insisting that the government gets proper court authorization first.

      Due Process for Everyone: You’re right that breaking the law—like damaging property—should have consequences. But the 5th Amendment ensures those consequences happen in a courtroom, not in the street. The concern here is about situations where the government skips that process entirely, which actually weakens the “rule of law” for all of us.

      The 10th Amendment Balance: The Supremacy Clause is definitely a huge part of the picture, but the 10th Amendment acts as its partner. It’s there to make sure the federal government doesn’t “commandeer” our local police or officials to do things that might go against our own state laws or community interests.

      Why a Free Press Matters: Regarding the “15 minutes of fame” mention, the 1st Amendment isn’t about the person in the video; it’s about the journalists reporting on it. We need the press to be able to work without being arrested so we can see the facts for ourselves and decide if the government is being fair or not.

      I don’t think anyone is saying the sky is falling, but just like we keep an eye on the weather, it’s worth keeping an eye on our rights to make sure they stay intact NOW and for the next generation. Also the real weather, has been quite bad lately as well.

      Reply
      1. Edward Strauss Avatar
        Edward Strauss

        After writing all of that you forgot the part that in a sanctuary city the police does not assist the ICE agents. So as far as playing by its own rules you have to deal with that part of it too. Demanding to see a warrant, the local Police get around this as well, They call in for one while they surround your house and get you anyway. In VA now you will get to see what this lunatic politics is about. Our new Executive who is from NJ and has no experience running anything, already has introduced this State to the lunatic fringe of the political spectrum. Hopefully you will explain to her and her team why this State needs such a radical change and what your “rights” are. And I will end this saying that when there are riots and law enforcement gets attacked things happen. When the Mayor and Governor use profanity and incite people this is what you get. There is nothing wrong with our rights. And the ones that paid attention in school still know what they are.

        Reply
        1. Jim Duncan Avatar
          Jim Duncan

          Your kitchen sink and whataboutism arguments don’t hold water and demonstrate the lack of credibility in your arguments.

          Watch this and tell me you agree with brutalizing American citizens.

          – Demanding a warrant is lawful. Breaking into houses and kidnapping people is a crime.
          – Murdering American citizens is a crime.
          – Using profanity is not a crime.
          – Kicking out a taillight does not warrant a death sentence.
          – No one is illegal. Those who come without proper documentation – civil not criminal.
          – Belittling authorities is not a crime.

          Reply
          1. Edward Strauss Avatar
            Edward Strauss

            Answers to what you stated above.
            Breaking down doors with a search warrant is legal, as is observed illegal activity. You can demand to see a warrant.
            It is not legal to murder anyone. Of course, a trial is required.
            Simple profanity is not a crime. But the Supreme Court has decided that true threats and “fighting words”—those that are likely to provoke someone into reacting violently or incite others to violence—are not protected speech.
            Kicking out a taillight is not punishable by death. And you have forgotten he was not shot for that. Stalking and interfering with law enforcement activities while armed is just plain stupid and unfortunately, he paid a terrible price for it.
            People are illegal when they have court issued removal orders against them.
            Simple belittling of Law Enforcement is not a crime but, threats, the above mentioned “fighting words”, Throwing objects at them, or interfering is.

            I am a person that grew up during the 60’s and has traveled the world and have seen the worst that humanity can inflict upon themselves. The reason that people keep coming here is because what you stated is an exaggeration. The many migrants that work at the same place that I do would disagree with you. They pay all their money to lawyers with some even having to reimburse the Govt. for the plane tickets that were sent to them once their refugee status was approved. They carry their papers as required by their work permits and identity cards. Have ITIN numbers, pay taxes, and work legally. Do you really think that they support what the current political narrative claims? They are required to present their identity cards to any law enforcement officer. They know this and agree with it. Of course, if you are illegal with a deportation order and do not care and choose to hide in the crowd you can claim that your rights, which do not exist, were violated…

            Reply
            1. Rich Pleasants Avatar
              Rich Pleasants

              Edward… I’m hoping we can move past the ‘us vs. them vs they’ rhetoric and stick to the legal issues. When we focus on personal habits or broad stereotypes, the discussion becomes less about learning and more about winning an argument. Can we get back to the specifics? You mentioned an exaggeration—could you clarify which part you mean so we can actually address the substance?

        2. Rich Pleasants Avatar
          Rich Pleasants

          Edward, I think we’re losing sight of the core issue. This isn’t about local politics or the new Governor; it’s about whether the federal government has to follow the Bill of Rights.

          Suggesting that “things happen” during raids isn’t a legal argument—it’s an excuse for bypassing Due Process. I’ve had family in law enforcement, since before and after I was born in 1967, and they were taught that their authority came from their commitment to the law, not their ability to ignore it. When agencies like ICE perform warrantless entries or use lethal force without accountability, they aren’t “enforcing the law”—they are breaking the very framework that keeps our community stable.

          Real law enforcement requires probable cause and judicial oversight. Demanding that the government play by its own rules isn’t “radical”—it’s the most American thing we can do.

          Reply
          1. Edward Strauss Avatar
            Edward Strauss

            I will give you an example of the type of information broadcast through media. Listening to the news tonight I kept hearing the phrase that 2 American Citizens were killed by ICE. Using your stated logic above what difference does it make what country of citizen they were. Dead Human is Dead Human. We are being fed a very twisted story of events and unless you were there that is what you are basing your narrative on. If Minn. had not refused to assist Federal Law Enforcement there would be a different story and that will probably be part of any resolution. ICE agents are trained to affect their arrests with local law enforcement. Current Minn. Polices are simply geared to defy the Federal Government which is also not enforcing the law. Where are they breaking into houses? People with orders of removal are illegal and are subject to removal on sight. These are facts you chose to ignore. Ask your family if they ever refused to assist Federal Agents. By repeating things you hear does not always reflect reality. Posting videos by Comedians does not add anything positive either. Both of you have chosen to live in an area where there was slavery and justice was determined by a rope and a tree. More recently there was massive resistance, violent civil rights protests, and strong efforts to keep things as they were. I am more interested in what is happening locally than a highly political narrative that changes every day. I do not harbor any illegal aliens with removal orders. I do not interfere or obstruct law enforcement nor encourage others to do so. I do not riot in the street if I do not get my way. America has always been a divided Country. At times far worse than others. I believe my eyes only, not some political drivel. America will be fine. Always has, always will. And check on how many illegals have outstanding removal orders issued for them in Va. Just get the facts, them tell me who is breaking the law…

            Reply
          2. Edward Strauss Avatar
            Edward Strauss

            First off, there is not any “we” issue. I address Jim’s concerns about legal with facts. You have not answered anything and seem to by trying to manipulate an outcome. I answered every point that was trying to be made. You have not answered one point. only generalizations. I am going to make it simple. People that have been given removal orders from a Judge should no longer be in this country. People, any people should not be murdered. The process if that happens is a trial. Not a ranting comedian or mob logic. You do not have to let Police in your home without a warrant but, if they come back with one it is on you when they break the door down. Following law enforcement around, blocking roads, damaging their vehicles, interfering with them might seem cool to your friends but will lead you to something painful that you do not want. Where you get your information and what you want to believe is totally on you. I have no interest in convincing you of anything. I actually suggest you read and understand what is written before commenting on it…

            Reply
            1. Rich Pleasants Avatar
              Rich Pleasants

              Hey Edward, just wanted to say I wasn’t trying to make this personal. I was really focused on the purpose of this blog, and everything else you’re bringing up isn’t really my focus for this specific piece.

            2. Edward Strauss Avatar
              Edward Strauss

              Answering specific claims with facts is the real issue and purpose of a conversation If you cannot answer any of the points being discussed what is the whole point of this? There is really so much false information being presented that something needed to be said. The law is easy and can be looked up and quoted. There seems not to be any interest in that. Hollering that it is raining when the sun is shining does not serve any purpose…

    Something to say?

    Also Read These