Talk:Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association

Ties to Oath Keepers?
Is this group a subset of the Oath Keepers or is it just connected via Mack? If the former, we should probably just incorporate it into a larger article on Oath Keepers. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 07:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The website doesnt mention it so... No. -- il' Dictator   Mikal  07:37, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The video on the home page mentions it. From what Mack says, it sounds like he might just be pallin' around with Oath Keepers rather than officially affiliated, though. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 07:48, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Sovereign citizens?
"The organization draws much of its philosophy from the similar sovereign citizens movement." Don't they have more in common with the militia movement? The point is not elaborated anyway - it's not clear what aspects of their philosophy they draw from the SCs. Fascination with common law? --ZooGuard (talk) 19:51, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * There's a good deal of overlapping wingnuttery, but I would say they fall into the militia movement, esp. w/ the connection w/ Oath Keepers. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
 * There appears to be some tenther/states' rights BS in here as well, even to a lower level (County rights? What about Louisiana?) -- Seth Peck (talk) 19:57, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Ferguson vigilantism
According to the New York Times, groups of Oath Keeper have organized into vigilante militias to "protect private businesses." Daily Kos also had something to say about it. Noisemobile (talk) 18:58, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
 * They're doing it again. DaL33T (talk) 18:21, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Why does "Oath Keepers" redirect here?
They are different organizations, albeit both centered around the same wingnuttery. Gooniepunk (talk) 03:11, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Oath Keeper origins
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the Oath Keepers originate loosely with birtherism? They were linked to a handful of military members who bought into birtherism and filed (universally unsuccessful) lawsuits claiming they couldn't follow orders from Obama because he's not American and constitutionally ineligible to even be president? When I first heard of the Oath Keepers, it was in this context- that they were "keeping their oath" by not following illegal orders from the president (ignoring the numerous problems with that concept). I also don't think it's a coincidence that they formed in spring 2009. --DarthBinky (talk) 16:49, 4 January 2016 (UTC)