Northwest Indiana Discussion

This is what you'll get when you vote for unconstitutional sheriff or all that you will be offered:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw_KZItj ... re=related

Yea well I didn't vote for the guy but it looks like I'll be paying part of the cost of his shiny new helicopter all the same.

So trivial, when you look at the big picture.

No, just indicative of his priorities and administrative skills. I actually picked one of the weaker things against him because there are so many examples of worse choices by him I didn't want to be typing all day. But I guess we could start with so many people dying on his watch or wrongfully just walking out of jail that I'm concerned that the state hasn't been investigating. Remember he even had a guy in his jail for many months over a can of soda and nobody even knew he was in there, including the presiding judge!

Yes, there are problems there that would be there under most, if not all, of the choices for sheriff that you will have in 2010.

The problems I see are much bigger than that, sheriffs across the country are not acting as they should when it comes to chain of command. Somewhere they have been told, and they believe, that the sheriff is NOT the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the land. To us citizens this is a very dangerous assumption.

I had ask the current sheriff this very question and his response was "Well... not exactly..."

BS! There is a reason the county sheriff IS the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the land and that is that he can be held directly responsible to the people for his actions because he is elected. Think about that, all other law enforcement positions are appointed.

He has the power to throw all federal agents out of his county if he deems it necessary. Before a federal agent can make an arrest in the county he must be deputized BY THE SHERIFF. He has the power to call up citizens and deputize them into a posse.

You raise a good point. Originally and when state's rights were equal to or greater than the Federal government a good case can be made that a sheriff is the head of law enforcement. But even looking at the state constitution it makes the office seem more administrative.

I'm not giving up my crossbows

Exactly, the federal government was NEVER intended to have more power over the states. They were intended to have jurisdiction over only 10 square miles (Wash, DC) and federal lands (military bases, now national forests, etc.) each state is like it's own country (they used to be called "nation states") which is why each state has it's own Constitution. The feds often use bribery (withholding highway funds for example) to force states to do whatever they want them to.
The sheriff sets policy for his deputies and the jail, holds prisoners for trial and collects taxes. He, himself, isn't the one out there kicking in doors, making arrests, etc. (often that is only photo op time now)

He can also launch investigations into any wrong doing, including public corruption. The sheriff is a very powerful position that I don't feel should be trusted to a member of law enforcement, that is the fox watching the hen house. He has a county police chief that can act in an advisory position for police concerns.

I forgot, the sheriff can also call up the militia.

Here's what I was looking for. Read this page http://www.constitution.org/mil/lawnanti.htm and you will understand more than the average American about one of the most deceitful ways we are being controlled. Go ahead and call Visclosky's office and ask him about the "War Powers Act" and if it is still in effect. If they claim it is not, ask then exactly when it was repealed. Don't expect a straight answer.

Excerpt:

http://www.constitution.org/mil/lawnanti.htm

Whether right or wrong I just don't see Roy Domingas sitting on a tank.

So, what is wrong with rounding up a couple hundred fugitives? I don't see your point.

And what legitimate newspaper did that article come from Maxx?

Only get your news from the mainstream government lap dogs? Good little sheep.

Will this work?
http://www.wreg.com/Global/story.asp?S=8165019

The Sheriff's Department says 332 people were arrested, 142 of whom are were fugitives.

Huh? When can we have a raid like that?

I don't get your point. Sounds to me more like an outstanding warrants check but with more man power than usual. Assuming the records are up to date it's not a bad thing to take 142 fugitives off of the streets.