fbpx
47 F
Spokane
Thursday, March 28, 2024
HomeCommentaryCiao to Choosing and Hello to Hiring, Part 2 

Ciao to Choosing and Hello to Hiring, Part 2 

Date:

Related stories

My Journey through Homelessness Part Five: Learning to Live Outside the Box

The value of my homeless experience lies not so much in having learned how to live outside — at least not in the geographical sense. The value of my homeless experience lies in having learned how to live outside the box.

Lost in Translation: Isn’t It Time We Moved Beyond a Fear-Based Repentance?

When I hear the kingdom is at hand, followed immediately by the command to repent, the good news is overshadowed by the fear that I’m not good enough to be part of the kingdom of God.

Inspiring Others: How Our Marriage Turned 50

As we prepare to celebrate 50 years there are so many thoughts and memories going through my head. I have joked about how I don't know how you've put up with me for this long, which is really true in a sense with my Irish enthusiasm and temper.

Taking the Road ‘Less Traveled by’ Has Made ‘All the Difference’

Pete Haug remembers hearing Robert Frost read his poem "The Road not Taken" 65 years ago. It reminded him of his spiritual journey out of the Christianity of his youth into choosing the Baha'i faith as an adult.

Ask an EOC: Can You Confess in Private to God but not in Church Confession and be Forgiven?

Concerning the sacrament of Confession, Christ directly gave the authority to his Church to remit or retain the sins of the penitent. 

Our Sponsors

spot_img
spot_img

Ciao to Choosing and Hello to Hiring, Part 2

By Scott McIntyre

In my previous article on this issue, I looked at whether we can be sure the best people are being secured, for positions that require highly qualified skills, when the decision is made by voting.  Here, I’m taking a giant leap in a different direction and looking at how voting may lead to behavior that could be harmful to our culture.

Sheriffs, unlike Police Chiefs, are usually voted into office, and with that process, the public seems set up for behavior by the elected official that wouldn’t be tolerated by the hired help.

In a situation where a law enforcement professional refused to hold people accountable for breaking a law, the hired officer could, and probably would, be terminated.  The voted into position officer, on the other hand, would be safe unless they were recalled or failed to win re-election.  But these professionals wouldn’t do such a thing anyway, right?  Let’s take a look and see.

In numerous online articles, I found examples given of actions by elected sheriffs that exactly matched this situation.

An argument for their right to disregard laws, such as the ones above, is that they were unconstitutional and that a sheriff is voted into office to uphold the citizen’s rights.

From my limited personal knowledge of the law, which includes six years as an administrative assistant at UC Legal – Office of the General Counsel for the University of California’s Office of the President, and my research, I could find nothing that allows a sheriff or other law enforcement officer, to disregard laws in effect because they didn’t accept their constitutionality.

Articles from the Thomas S. Foley Institute of Public Policy and Public Service at Washington State University and Everytown for Gun Safety were clear that this type of action by sheriffs did not have a legal basis and should not occur.

Since the behavior is obviously happening, even if it shouldn’t, the bigger question is why?  It seems likely that a sheriff could ‘get away’ with avoiding the enforcement of a law if a majority of their voters were not supportive of the law in the first place.  

I can imagine a sheriff having a pretty good knowledge of the beliefs of the people who elected them, so it seems reasonable, though not acceptable to me, that an elected officer could disregard the law breaking when it occurred in a situation that their voters didn’t support.  The minority of the public who may become angered over the sheriff’s action, would be unlikely to have a big enough impact to affect the officer’s position, so basically it would be ‘no harm, no foul’.

But I argue that we don’t want any one person in law enforcement, when not specifically given the right, to disregard a law because of their personal opinions about it’s constitutionality.  

Scott McIntyre
Scott McIntyre
Scott McIntyre is glad his parents didn’t name him Vladimir or he’d be listed last on this page. While a long time California resident, he was the Oakland Spirituality Examiner for Examiner.com from 2011-12 and about the same time began blogging on several topics. The first, teaching Christians how to lovingly share their spiritual beliefs, emphasized skills that can benefit all forms of one-to-one interaction. He also writes on marriage, travel, downsizing, humor and the motive behind people’s words and actions. After retiring in 2016, Scott embarked on some major ‘R & R’ — Relocating and Rebranding. Following in his sister’s footsteps from the early 80’s, and later in the decade, his parent’s, Scott left the Golden State to become a Washingtonian in a small town just west of Spokane County.

Our Sponsors

spot_img
spot_img
spot_img
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
spot_img
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x