What school was Boulter going to guard, if any? I don’t see any reason to think that he would be more dangerous than any other non-drug-related felon with elementary-school children.
The Salon article is titled "Joe Arpaio hired a convicted child-sex criminal for armed school “posse” ". It then relays the story of the sex criminal, and then states this “And Jacob Cutler, **another **member of the group Arpaio organized to “save our kids,”” (bolding mine). So, I disagree that the article doesn’t say he hired Boulter for the posse. If he didn’t hire Boulter for the posse, Salon should issue a retraction.
In all the Doper community, only Bricker and magellan01 are such flaming bigot assholes as to rush to the defense of Sheriff Arpaio.
I hope.
I think they’re nonexistent. As for the rest of your post, save the condescension for someone who cares. “Well, the patchy and inconsistent background checks seem to probably filter out some of the really bad criminals, so let’s spend lots of time debating what ‘crime’ means and what constitutes ‘really bad’ and what definition of ‘some’ is too much.”
No. It’s a stupid idea, it’s going to undoubtedly bring some people who really shouldn’t be around small children into close contact with small children, and it brings no benefit whatsoever. It is grandstanding bullshit done by a sheriff who very clearly likes publicity more than he likes serving his constituents.
So, you stand behind your OP, eh, genius?
Salon should issue a retraction. The posse application disqualifies any person with a felony conviction. Boucher was never hired.
Here (PDF) is the posse application which clearly specifies felony convictions disqualify an applicant.
I also called the MCSO and spoke to someone in the MSCO, Terri Mullholland’s office (press secretary) (602) 506-3416 who confirmed that Boucher was never a posse hire.
And you know, this is the type of loose thinking that gets you in trouble repeatedly. You think all people in the Doper community have even read your mind-numbingly dumb OP, never mind agree with it?
:rolleyes:
Thanks, and thanks for the follow-up research. The Salon article is garbage, then.
By the way, I have some work to do at my actual job, and I’m going to do that now. I thought I should let Bricker know so that he doesn’t get worried when I don’t make any posts for longer than 3 minutes or so. Feed the crickets while I’m gone, would you?
PS: You might want to call back and ask about “Boulter,” since that’s the guy’s actual name.
Here’s your failstamp, wear it proudly. Watch the video, specifically from 5:50 to the end and then come back and apologize to MsWhatsit, Salon and everyone else you smugly condescended to.
The article says sex offenders. It named one, who we now know was not hired. Cutler was accused of demoes tic violence, not for a sex offense, and specifically not a sex offense involving children.
I notice how you’re edging away from some of the factual issues here.
You said: “The KPHO story does mention loads of other criminals who were hired for the posse…”
I want to know what you mean by “criminals.”
No one with a felony conviction was hired by the posse.
Do you mean that even an arrest record, with no conviction, should disqualify a person for such a position?
A police officer that arrests an individual for no probable cause, with all charges dropped – should that individual still be disqualified?
What did you mean when you said that loads of other criminals had been hired?
Even if every posse member underwent a six-month background check and had no convictions, arrests, or even a parking ticket, it would still be (B).
You win the thread.
[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
In all the Doper community, only Bricker and magellan01 are such flaming bigot assholes as to rush to the defense of Sheriff Arpaio.
[/QUOTE]
Remember that whole “fighting ignorance” thing?
“Still on the posse roster” simply means they mistakenly failed to remove his name from the posse roster after he was fired.
And the video even has the reporter saying as much.
…for clarity’s sake:
“Confirmed he was never a posse hire SUBSEQUENT TO HIS 2009 FIRING.”
I thought that was clear, but in light of Inner_Stickler’s confusion…
Even if every member of the posse had a clean record, statistically speaking it’s probably still more likely that one of them is a potential sex offender than any of them will stop a school shooting.
Er, maybe.
[QUOTE=MsWhatsit]
PS: You might want to call back and ask about “Boulter,” since that’s the guy’s actual name.
[/QUOTE]
If this is how they take care of their records then I have no faith in their vetting procedures.
This statement represents a sentiment I’ve seen many times from some of the most proudly liberal, enlightened folks here.
If a person is “bad,” then, really, any criticisms can safely be made about him without regard to their truth or falsity.
I don’t agree, BrainGlutton. You see a defense of Arpaio as bigoted, or in favor of bigotry.
But I see value in the actual facts. You may disagree with many things about Arpaio; you cannot, however, continue to claim that he hired a past sex offender to be a posse member. Correcting that claim is not defense of bigotry.
But attacking me as a bigot for correcting the claim… I think that shows your true intent here. And it’s not fighting ignorance – it’s using ignorance of your reading audience to advance your agenda.
Regardless of your faith in their vetting procedure – they did NOT hire a convicted sex offender.