Florida new anti-riot law

[alang1216]

Maybe someone can explain the apparent difference here. Is there is a conservative out there who feels the Federal government is too overbearing by telling the States what they have to do while those same conservatives are fine with the States telling their own cities and counties what they have to do?

The difference is that the US Constitution outlines States Rights. No state has a Constitution that has city and town rights.

So is the problem in the US Constitution or with the States?

 

[justoffal]

For those of you on the left confused as to what real leadership looks like, all you have to do is look at Republican Governor Ron DeSantis. Harsher penalties for rioters and you cannot damage any monuments of any kind. In those commie parts of the state, it would fine all local governments who interfere with policing during a riot.

This is how to do things the RIGHT way.

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs controversial âanti-riotâ bill into law

A controversial Florida bill aimed at cracking down on violent protests was signed into law on Monday by Gov. Ron DeSantis.

www.wesh.com

Interesting that the law mandates how much localities must spend on law enforcement. Big government is OK is you control the government I guess.

They mandate no such thing. The towns and municipalities are free to decide what they will spend on their police departments. Florida is also free to decide whether or not it will help a certain town or municipality that refuses to help itself. It is also free to protect Floridians whose own cities and towns have abandoned them to violence by holding local government responsible putting them in that situation.

Jo

Do you prefer "coerce"? Semantics. It is the State telling the locals how to spend their money.

Nope....it is the state refusing to invest tax payer state revenues money into lawless and unprotected zone.

 

[justoffal]

Maybe someone can explain the apparent difference here. Is there is a conservative out there who feels the Federal government is too overbearing by telling the States what they have to do while those same conservatives are fine with the States telling their own cities and counties what they have to do?

The difference is that the US Constitution outlines States Rights. No state has a Constitution that has city and town rights.

So is the problem in the US Constitution or with the States?

There is no problem. There is only retarded-ness. State revenues should be prudently managed .... Handing money to a municipality that intentionally reduces its own risk management apparatus is neither prudent or rightful. It's....RETARDED.

JO

 

[alang1216]

For those of you on the left confused as to what real leadership looks like, all you have to do is look at Republican Governor Ron DeSantis. Harsher penalties for rioters and you cannot damage any monuments of any kind. In those commie parts of the state, it would fine all local governments who interfere with policing during a riot.

This is how to do things the RIGHT way.

Florida Gov. DeSantis signs controversial âanti-riotâ bill into law

A controversial Florida bill aimed at cracking down on violent protests was signed into law on Monday by Gov. Ron DeSantis.

www.wesh.com

Interesting that the law mandates how much localities must spend on law enforcement. Big government is OK is you control the government I guess.

They mandate no such thing. The towns and municipalities are free to decide what they will spend on their police departments. Florida is also free to decide whether or not it will help a certain town or municipality that refuses to help itself. It is also free to protect Floridians whose own cities and towns have abandoned them to violence by holding local government responsible putting them in that situation.

Jo

Do you prefer "coerce"? Semantics. It is the State telling the locals how to spend their money.

Nope....it is the state refusing to invest tax payer state revenues money into lawless and unprotected zone.

Is the State telling the locality how to spend State money or Is the State telling the locality how to spend locality money?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So is the problem in the US Constitution or with the States?

No problem with either. From the beginning, our states were to operate like individual countries. The only time the federal government were to be involved is when it was a matter of all states. Therefore our founders gave states rights to operate their state as they felt necessary.

In those states, the state government has jurisdiction on how their counties, cities and towns operate. If your state highway speed limit is 65mph, then a city or county can't reduce that highway speed to 40 mph because it goes through their town. The state sets the speed limits.

Many years ago my niece got pulled over on the highway. The cops tested her BAL and it was .01 above DUI level. Because she cooperated with the officers, passed the field sobriety test with no probems, they were debating on whether to just let her go or not. A state trooper pulled up, talked to the officers, and ordered them to place her under arrest for DUI. The state police have jurisdiction over the entire state. The officers told my niece they had no choice. The state police were the boss, even though she was pulled over in their city.