Should Sheriffs/Police Chiefs get to pick and choose which laws they enforce?

[bucs90]

This is a topic that has been brought up in a few conversations. Should Sheriffs or Police Chiefs have the ability to pick and choose which laws or which incidents they'll enforce? Or, in other words, have descretion on duty? There are 800,000 cops in America. Should each have the same descretion?

To me, having that freedom to pick what and when to enforce is a foundation of our democratic process. Its kinda like a second opinion on elections in a way. We the people elect mayors, city councils, governors, senators, presidents, etc, etc. They pass laws. But, what if we the people then say "Oh, hold on, we dont like that law". Well, the people we elected disagree, and already passed it. Kinda messed up isnt it?

But, that law is just ink on paper. Only enforcement of that law makes it truly a governing practice on us. So, our federal, state and city cops have that authority. Should they have descretion of when and which ones to enforce?

My past experience- I would often let people just toss or flush small amounts of weed, under 5-8 grams. Minor traffic violations? I was on patrol, not traffic team. Ignore! Lights on bikes at night- yep, a law. I'd never write the ticket, but stopped cyclists to tell them to put a light on their bike so no drunk driver would smash into them.

Shoud I, or the other 800,000 cops, have no descretion in enforcing those laws? What about bigger ones? I once stopped an Army guy driving from the base in Augusta to Tennessee. He had a .45 under his seat. Not his military service weapon, just a personally owned one. Why? I dont know. He just had it. Said he forgot it was there. No record. A Sgt in the Army. I ignored it (illegal to have pistol under car seat). No ticket. No arrest. No report. Never happened in my eyes. Or, should I have been required to put the guy in jail for it? Would it had been different if the driver was a complete asshole to me, and had a lengthy rap sheet, and was crusing around in one of the shitholes of Southeast Atlanta at 2am??? Probably would've been.

What about when a desparate person tries to take a package of baby food from a Wal-Mart, because their kid is starving? Will arrest make a difference to Wal-Mart? No. To that kid? Yes. Could, or should, the cop be able to just let the guy go, put him on trespass from the WalMart to ensure he doesnt do it again there, and let that be the end of it? I dont know. Each cop is free to make that choice.



So, before people start bitching about how sheriffs or police should be fired for not enforcing every single law, every single time it is violated, they should stop and think for a minute what that would mean. And if you say "YES, it's their sworn job", then I say, go apply. Become a cop. Then you will have the power to enforce every single last law on the books where you work. And see how long you have the will to keep doing it that way.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

This is a topic that has been brought up in a few conversations. Should Sheriffs or Police Chiefs have the ability to pick and choose which laws or which incidents they'll enforce? Or, in other words, have descretion on duty? There are 800,000 cops in America. Should each have the same descretion?

To me, having that freedom to pick what and when to enforce is a foundation of our democratic process. Its kinda like a second opinion on elections in a way. We the people elect mayors, city councils, governors, senators, presidents, etc, etc. They pass laws. But, what if we the people then say "Oh, hold on, we dont like that law". Well, the people we elected disagree, and already passed it. Kinda messed up isnt it?

But, that law is just ink on paper. Only enforcement of that law makes it truly a governing practice on us. So, our federal, state and city cops have that authority. Should they have descretion of when and which ones to enforce?

My past experience- I would often let people just toss or flush small amounts of weed, under 5-8 grams. Minor traffic violations? I was on patrol, not traffic team. Ignore! Lights on bikes at night- yep, a law. I'd never write the ticket, but stopped cyclists to tell them to put a light on their bike so no drunk driver would smash into them.

Shoud I, or the other 800,000 cops, have no descretion in enforcing those laws? What about bigger ones? I once stopped an Army guy driving from the base in Augusta to Tennessee. He had a .45 under his seat. Not his military service weapon, just a personally owned one. Why? I dont know. He just had it. Said he forgot it was there. No record. A Sgt in the Army. I ignored it (illegal to have pistol under car seat). No ticket. No arrest. No report. Never happened in my eyes. Or, should I have been required to put the guy in jail for it? Would it had been different if the driver was a complete asshole to me, and had a lengthy rap sheet, and was crusing around in one of the shitholes of Southeast Atlanta at 2am??? Probably would've been.

What about when a desparate person tries to take a package of baby food from a Wal-Mart, because their kid is starving? Will arrest make a difference to Wal-Mart? No. To that kid? Yes. Could, or should, the cop be able to just let the guy go, put him on trespass from the WalMart to ensure he doesnt do it again there, and let that be the end of it? I dont know. Each cop is free to make that choice.



So, before people start bitching about how sheriffs or police should be fired for not enforcing every single law, every single time it is violated, they should stop and think for a minute what that would mean. And if you say "YES, it's their sworn job", then I say, go apply. Become a cop. Then you will have the power to enforce every single last law on the books where you work. And see how long you have the will to keep doing it that way.

Why not? The Attoney General does.

 

[bucs90]

Yes he does. That is one issue with descretion. People wont always like it when they decide not to enforce some laws. I, for one, was sick when Holder based his voters rights decision based on race. In fact, one of the few guidelines of descretion is that race, gender, ethnicity are NOT supposed to be considered in deciding when to enforce or not. I believe Holder acted immorally in deciding not to enforce the law- not in the act of not enforcing it, but why he decided not to enforce it.

 

[Oscar Wao]

Unjust laws shouldn't be enforced.

"I'm just doing my job" and "It's the law" are catch phrases of the Nazis and their types.

 

[Freewill]

They pick and chose every single day.

 

[Intense]

Should the Attorney General Cherry Pick which Laws He should Enforce?

 

[bucs90]

Unjust laws shouldn't be enforced.

"I'm just doing my job" and "It's the law" are catch phrases of the Nazis and their types.

Very true. Now, sometimes those explanations are valid. Cops dont always enjoy enforcing laws. After a while, you actually start feeling a bit of sympathy towards the people, but, you know that enforcing that law is the right thing to do and makes society better. So, to take the personal side out of it, they say that sometimes.

But yes. Having blind enforcement of any and all laws is a perfect recipe for disaster.

 

[Desperado]

Ask the Attorney General his views about that on Immigration laws.

 

[bucs90]

Should the Attorney General Cherry Pick which Laws He should Enforce?

Yes. Like his decisions or not (I mostly have not), as an enforcer of the law, he should have descretion to not prosecute some violations of law. To take that descretion away is asking for disaster.

Not having descretion is what leads to kids lemonade stands being shut down due to lack of a business license. That sadly happens sometimes even with descretion, because some uppity citizen with a lawyer friend complains about it, and the police chief orders the law be enforced. The cops sent to enforce it risk their jobs or promotions if they say no. Many do say no, and we never hear about it because, well, the lemonade stand never got shut down and the incident all went down behind closed doors at the PD. But a few times, it happens, and its stupid to enforce that law on kids lemonade stands.

 

[Amelia]

It's moot. Since resources are limited, the sheriffs CAN'T enforce everything.

 

[bucs90]

It's moot. Since resources are limited, the sheriffs CAN'T enforce everything.

Haha, very true. If cops enforced every single violation of the law, they'd be so tied up with paperwork and babysitting prisoners, there wouldn't be any cops left on the road 2 hours into each shift.

Of course, that fact could be proof that we just have too many laws.

 

[PratchettFan]

This is a topic that has been brought up in a few conversations. Should Sheriffs or Police Chiefs have the ability to pick and choose which laws or which incidents they'll enforce? Or, in other words, have descretion on duty? There are 800,000 cops in America. Should each have the same descretion?

To me, having that freedom to pick what and when to enforce is a foundation of our democratic process. Its kinda like a second opinion on elections in a way. We the people elect mayors, city councils, governors, senators, presidents, etc, etc. They pass laws. But, what if we the people then say "Oh, hold on, we dont like that law". Well, the people we elected disagree, and already passed it. Kinda messed up isnt it?

But, that law is just ink on paper. Only enforcement of that law makes it truly a governing practice on us. So, our federal, state and city cops have that authority. Should they have descretion of when and which ones to enforce?

My past experience- I would often let people just toss or flush small amounts of weed, under 5-8 grams. Minor traffic violations? I was on patrol, not traffic team. Ignore! Lights on bikes at night- yep, a law. I'd never write the ticket, but stopped cyclists to tell them to put a light on their bike so no drunk driver would smash into them.

Shoud I, or the other 800,000 cops, have no descretion in enforcing those laws? What about bigger ones? I once stopped an Army guy driving from the base in Augusta to Tennessee. He had a .45 under his seat. Not his military service weapon, just a personally owned one. Why? I dont know. He just had it. Said he forgot it was there. No record. A Sgt in the Army. I ignored it (illegal to have pistol under car seat). No ticket. No arrest. No report. Never happened in my eyes. Or, should I have been required to put the guy in jail for it? Would it had been different if the driver was a complete asshole to me, and had a lengthy rap sheet, and was crusing around in one of the shitholes of Southeast Atlanta at 2am??? Probably would've been.

What about when a desparate person tries to take a package of baby food from a Wal-Mart, because their kid is starving? Will arrest make a difference to Wal-Mart? No. To that kid? Yes. Could, or should, the cop be able to just let the guy go, put him on trespass from the WalMart to ensure he doesnt do it again there, and let that be the end of it? I dont know. Each cop is free to make that choice.



So, before people start bitching about how sheriffs or police should be fired for not enforcing every single law, every single time it is violated, they should stop and think for a minute what that would mean. And if you say "YES, it's their sworn job", then I say, go apply. Become a cop. Then you will have the power to enforce every single last law on the books where you work. And see how long you have the will to keep doing it that way.

I guess that depends. Is there a difference between letting the kid go for shoplifting or establishing a policy that you will not enforce shoplifting laws?

 

[asaratis]

LEO should have discretionary powers in enforcement of laws.


I got stopped for speeding on a nice, smooth interstate highway in Tennessee back in the late '60s. When I explained to the JP that EVERYBODY was speeding and I shouldn't be singled out for a citation and fine, the conversation went sorta like this:

Judge: Have you ever been duck hunting?

Me: Yes sir.

Judge: Did you ever kill all the ducks you saw?

Me: No sir.

Judge: Well then, you must have picked some out for killin' and let the other one's go...huh?

Me: Yes sir.

Judge: Well, that's just about what the officer did when he picked you out of the crowd. The fine will be sixty dollars.

Me: Thank you, sir.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

You're lumping Sheriffs (elected officials) with police officers (municipal, state or federal employees).

That tells me you're a moron.

 

[jtpr312]

"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."

Thomas Jefferson.

 

[asaratis]

You're lumping Sheriffs (elected officials) with police officers (municipal, state or federal employees).

That tells me you're a moron.

I include sheriffs and police officers in the category of LEO (Law Enforcement Officers). That does not make me a moron, moron.

 

[OriginalShroom]

Obama decided early that he wasn't going to enforce or defend DOMA much to the glee of Liberals everywhere...

Only a Hypocrite would complain when others do it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Obama decided early that he wasn't going to enforce or defend DOMA much to the glee of Liberals everywhere...

Only a Hypocrite would complain when others do it.

So if sheriffs in North Dakota refuse to enforce the new unconstitutional abortion law, you'll be on their side?

 

[NYcarbineer]

At least the National Sheriff's Association understands the Constitution:

WHEREAS, the doctrine of judicial review grants to the United States Supreme Court and the
lower courts the power to determine the constitutionality of any law and sheriffs do not possess
the legal authority to interpret the constitutionality of any law....

 

[Clementine]

This is a topic that has been brought up in a few conversations. Should Sheriffs or Police Chiefs have the ability to pick and choose which laws or which incidents they'll enforce? Or, in other words, have descretion on duty? There are 800,000 cops in America. Should each have the same descretion?

To me, having that freedom to pick what and when to enforce is a foundation of our democratic process. Its kinda like a second opinion on elections in a way. We the people elect mayors, city councils, governors, senators, presidents, etc, etc. They pass laws. But, what if we the people then say "Oh, hold on, we dont like that law". Well, the people we elected disagree, and already passed it. Kinda messed up isnt it?

But, that law is just ink on paper. Only enforcement of that law makes it truly a governing practice on us. So, our federal, state and city cops have that authority. Should they have descretion of when and which ones to enforce?

My past experience- I would often let people just toss or flush small amounts of weed, under 5-8 grams. Minor traffic violations? I was on patrol, not traffic team. Ignore! Lights on bikes at night- yep, a law. I'd never write the ticket, but stopped cyclists to tell them to put a light on their bike so no drunk driver would smash into them.

Shoud I, or the other 800,000 cops, have no descretion in enforcing those laws? What about bigger ones? I once stopped an Army guy driving from the base in Augusta to Tennessee. He had a .45 under his seat. Not his military service weapon, just a personally owned one. Why? I dont know. He just had it. Said he forgot it was there. No record. A Sgt in the Army. I ignored it (illegal to have pistol under car seat). No ticket. No arrest. No report. Never happened in my eyes. Or, should I have been required to put the guy in jail for it? Would it had been different if the driver was a complete asshole to me, and had a lengthy rap sheet, and was crusing around in one of the shitholes of Southeast Atlanta at 2am??? Probably would've been.

What about when a desparate person tries to take a package of baby food from a Wal-Mart, because their kid is starving? Will arrest make a difference to Wal-Mart? No. To that kid? Yes. Could, or should, the cop be able to just let the guy go, put him on trespass from the WalMart to ensure he doesnt do it again there, and let that be the end of it? I dont know. Each cop is free to make that choice.



So, before people start bitching about how sheriffs or police should be fired for not enforcing every single law, every single time it is violated, they should stop and think for a minute what that would mean. And if you say "YES, it's their sworn job", then I say, go apply. Become a cop. Then you will have the power to enforce every single last law on the books where you work. And see how long you have the will to keep doing it that way.

Not any more than Obama should choose which federal laws he wishes to uphold. If the government can completely ignore immigration laws, doesn't that set a precedent? If you think a law is stupid, ignore it?

Seriously, Obama has no right to ignore immigration laws.

Any overreaching gun laws go against the constitution and no one should feel obligated to obey an ignorant government by denying rights to citizens.

Obamacare goes against the constitution because Obama himself said it's not a tax.

If a law is unconstitutional, we all have a right to stand up and refuse to follow it. That is how the country is designed, though liberals rue that fact.