Discussion in 'Politics and Religion' started by Kel Varnsen, Nov 18, 2017.
Elected Sheriffs need to go
Political appointees are better?
For the most part, yes. Look at the worst sheriffs - AZ, TX, NC, etc - all elected.
Police Chiefs are appointed. Yes, some are bad, but they are far more accountable than the Wild West racist sheriffs like Arpaio, etc.
Chief of Police are appointed
Appointed sheriffs would be subject to oversight. Sheriffs enforce law, not establish it. There is no policy basis for their elections, therefore it becomes strictly political, oftentimes grandstanding.
Different states and different communities have several layers of government that intermingle as well. Phoenix has a chief of police. The county it resides in has a sheriff also.
I never heard of any differentiation between jurisdictions or types of crimes that are policed and investigated by either party. Different counties and states have similar issues I'm sure. I would have thought that the county government and police departments would have the jurisdiction in unincorporated areas of the county, but sheriff's offices operate within cities all the time, so I'm a bit confused.
It depends on the state. In Arizona, the Sheriff has jurisdiction over all the non-federal land, though in practice should (and most do) defer to city police. The Sheriff's department isn't staffed to do routine policing in cities.
New York City has an appointed Sheriff. The Sheriff's office is involved in Civil crimes, the police take care of the criminal stuff.
Other than that, I don't know where else Sheriffs are appointed.
Look at all the retweets of Clarke’s tweet. The stupid spreads super fast.
She needs to be impeached.
Why is it that one word is almost sufficient to explain this?
More reason to eliminate the Sheriff's office.
Or put it subordinate to the County Commission.
Separate names with a comma.