Sir Michael Jagger, 1969
Two.
Cycle of fifths.
C has none, G has 1, D has 2. And so on.
Personally, if I was the local cops, and I got called in by some out of state Buford T Justice, I’d expect that anything serious to warrant that much attention would result in an investigation and charges. If it was bullshit (as it seems to be from the lack of charges) and no witnesses testimony justified an arrest, I would be PISSED at that sheriff guy, and be serioulsy thinking of putting the cuffs on him. For wasting my time, making false statements, creating an incident, whatever I could “make fit”.
As the question in the OP was not “Is this legal?”, while your input is valuable (as I personally would have thought that such activity would be beyond the legal scope of a sheriff), the idea that your input of, yes, it is legal, should take over the entire conversation, and not allow anyone to express their opinion without you hopping in to tell them that their opinion (as they very well know) has no legal bearing is a bit over done.
The question in the op was in fact “What the simple fuck?” My emphasis.
Personally, if I were of the opinion that what the sheriff did was wrong, but also of the legal knowledge that what he did was legal, my post would be along the lines of, “Yeah, what a piece of shit he is, unfortunately, nothing he did actually broke the law.” By leaving out the first part, you implicitly condone the actions that you legally allow.
Wrong. They can be un-elected, next time around, they can come under state and federal investigation (and go to prison), etc. So yes, there is “a carpet”, if it can be justified and proved.
Unless I’m misunderstanding, Clarke is the local Sheriff. They were both coming home from Dallas.
Um, yes, we do. That’s how our government works here in the United States. It’s how societies in general work, too.
On a website devoted to fighting ignorance, it seems odd indeed to passionately defend one forum as a safe spot for ignorance.
I disagree with your conclusion that the Pit is a haven for arguments from opinion.
Cough…WITHIN the rules of the system…if YOU decide the system is TOTALLY broken and has been for awhile…welll break out the pitch forks…well, if not, maybe CTFD and see what transpires when the system keeps chugging along.
By what standard? My opinion? Your opinion? The law? A poll of all red-headed left handed pipe-fitters under 40?
Tell me what standard you wish to apply and I’ll try my best to answer.
Bricker, I would be interested in your response to this. I almost always find your legal posts useful but this time you seem to be insisting that the legal point of view is the only thing worth discussing, and I wonder why.
Our society—any human society, really—works only when people voluntarily adhere to codes of conduct that are not defined in law. To use a political example—although these kinds of things aren’t necessarily political—the last few years of Republican control of Congress and Trump show what happens when a group of people in power decide to reject standards of conduct that are not enforced by law, but by custom and voluntary agreement.
Right now our democratic institutions are on the verge of collapse and we’re sliding toward some kind of anarchy or authoritarianism, and all that because a group of people have decided that they will not be bound by examples set in the past.
Insisting on narrow legal interpretation of every public interaction is driving us into the ground.
Only if you have the necessary votes, which you obviously didn’t.
Apparently we had the votes just not in the right places. If you mean what I think you meant.
That’s how our system works. People need to stop whining about the “popular vote”, which is irrelevant.
Whining? Speak for yourself. The remarkable number of people who do not support the president right now is not irrelevant.
Yes, it is.
Is it appropriate for a police department to obliquely threaten a private citizen in a public forum? And secondly, is it legal?
Would it be legal for the policeman in question to approach the private citizen in person and say the same thin to him? (If I were to really harass you wouldn’t be around to whine about it? )
Yah think? Ya think that incumbent Congresscritters aren’t looking at those big-ass numbers, and wondering when might be the exact right time to hit the silk, as in “Geronimo!”. Well, OK. Sure, why not?
Has to be an “objective standard”, doesn’t it? Isn’t that what you say when you are Brickersplaining stuff to us?