Opinions of The Sheriffs First Law - Page 2
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 16 of 16

Thread: Opinions of The Sheriffs First Law

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    20

    Opinions of the Sheriff first law

    Civilian Review boards tend to be political footballs plus approval of a warrant must be done in a timely manner, something boards are not known for.

  2.   
  3. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Corby View Post
    Civilian Review boards tend to be political footballs plus approval of a warrant must be done in a timely manner, something boards are not known for.
    Civilian Review is exactly that, a review after the fact. They would have no say in processing warrants. They would be used to evaluate cases of officer misconduct or other procedural problems.

  4. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Texas, for now
    Posts
    57
    It should be pointed out that Sheriff Dupnik in Tuscon is an elected official. My sister lives there. Says he's an idiot. How has that worked out for them?

    IMO, he's a few pawns short of a chess board.

  5. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    Checks & Balances my Friends, checks and balances. Have to have them. There should be only ONE Ultimate Authority. Everyone else, especially in Government, checks & balances. Our Sheriff and Coroner are both elected to ensure the Sheriff isn't judge, jury and executioner. Our State investigative group known as SLED functions like most States, FDLE in Fla, GBI in Ga. But even those depts answer to the Governor so the C&B's are still there. Any sheriff in any county in SC can and will issue short term CWP's if asked. But as for running everything through his office. BAD IDEA. That means ALL INFO is bottle necked in one man. Way too much power there to abuse.
    Just my humble opinion.
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  6. #15
    I don't agree with this law. Being in iowa and experiencing the Sheriff's discretion with the permit systems (hooray for becoming shall issue), this is a bad idea.

    Ex. 1) I have friends who are an excellent shot but couldn't get a permit because they weren't close friends or politically connected with the Sheriff. In fact, I would go as far to say that I would be willing to carry a BUG for them to let them use in the right situation. (I know major legal implications there)

    Ex. 2) Now that the shall issue law went into effect, Sheriff's in some areas passed "no weapons allowed" ordinances in direct violation of state law which gives total preemption to the state. (iowa code chapter 724.28) And they did it after being informed directly that their ordinance was illegal and would probably incite lawsuits against them.

    I understand the thinking behind it but let these examples make you think twice before endorsing it.
    An armed society is a polite society.

  7. #16
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PANHANDLE, FL
    Posts
    144
    "An armed society is a polite society" ... excellent, truthful and to the point you make!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast