Skip to main content

View Diary: Ohio Sheriff Calls President Obama An Enemy - Won't Enforce Laws He Doesn't Like (252 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ronald - why? (5+ / 0-)

    At this point he has done nothing wrong. First, Congress will have to pass a law that requires the sheriff to take an affirmative action. At this point that seems highly unlikely. However, if they did pass a law that required his help and he ignored that law then you will have a reason for the AG and US Marshall to pay a visit.

    "let's talk about that"

    by VClib on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 09:28:27 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  so, you approve of the content of his letter? (0+ / 0-)

      That way lies treason.

      The "extreme wing" of the Democratic Party is the wing that is hell-bent on protecting the banks and credit card companies. ~ Kos

      by ozsea1 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:04:37 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This sheriff is an idiot (5+ / 0-)

        and the content of his letter is nonsense. However, at this point he has violated no laws. Non-action could never be viewed as treason, given the very explicit requirements for that specific crime as outlined in the Constitution.

        "let's talk about that"

        by VClib on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:16:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Depends on how he plans to 'not tollerate' ANY (0+ / 0-)
          Any edict, regulation, or so-called 'federal law' which infringes on the right of the citizens of Hancock County, Ohio to keep and bear arms for their security will not be tolerated, recognized or enforced by me or my office.

          guns are fun v. hey buddy, watch what you are doing -- which side are you on?

          by 88kathy on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:58:22 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  kathy - he would not have to "tolerate" (0+ / 0-)

            in a violent manner to be guilty of any crime and still would likely not be treason. I read "tolerated" to mean ignored, but who knows? It's highly unlikely that any new federal gun control law will require county sheriffs to enforce them. The ATF will do the enforcing.

            "let's talk about that"

            by VClib on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:06:53 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  True and true enough (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          VClib, trumpeter

          Footfalls that advocate nullification lead down the path to treason. This country went over that Constitutional cliff once and these idiots want to reignite the Civil War all over again.

          Sadly ironic that the 2nd Amendment, which was passed to placate the Southern states and help them keep slaves in check, is the banner around which these idiots rally.

          VC, there is everything wrong with what the sherrif said, and your question seemed rather silly and provocative, to say the least.
          But, my question to you was out of bounds. I apologize.

          The "extreme wing" of the Democratic Party is the wing that is hell-bent on protecting the banks and credit card companies. ~ Kos

          by ozsea1 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:27:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Treason has a very specific definition and this (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        myboo, Noddy, johnny wurster, Ahianne

        is not treason.  He'd have to aid and abet an enemy of the United States - which usually requires a declaration of war but might different in the world of AUMFs that we currently live in -  or actively make war against the US to qualify for treason.

        This is intent to commit deriliction of duty.  It's borderline sedition.  It's unacceptable but it's not punishable by death (as treason is).  

        "If you can find money to kill people, you can find money to help people." -Tony Benn (-6.38,-6.36)

        by The Rational Hatter on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:19:06 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  One does not need to approve (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Catte Nappe, YucatanMan

        of something in order to point out that it is not yet illegal.

        Treason has a very specific definition and criteria which this sheriff does not meet.

        He's an idiot, and we may freely mock him and taunt him for his idiocy, but he hasn't yet done anything illegal except to declare he won't do his job.

        That's sufficient grounds to fire him in such a way he does not collect his pension or unemployment - and that will make him even more bitter towards our Federal government, for he will blame the government for his job loss and not himself.

        All knowledge is worth having. Check out OctopodiCon to support steampunk learning and fun. Also, on DKos, check out the Itzl Alert Network.

        by Noddy on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 10:54:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  "that's sufficient grounds to fire him" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Catte Nappe

          How do we know what grounds are required to remove the sheriff from public office? He is an elected official. It may be that he can only be removed by losing the next election, recall, or if he is convicted of a crime.  

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:13:13 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I would think anyone who declares (0+ / 0-)

            they won't do the job for which they are hired is more than sufficient grounds to fire them.

            Anyone who continues to keep an employee who willfully won't perform the duties the job requires deserves to suffer the consequences - and trust me, a slacker employee (elected or not) will be a great detriment to the business/community.

            All knowledge is worth having. Check out OctopodiCon to support steampunk learning and fun. Also, on DKos, check out the Itzl Alert Network.

            by Noddy on Tue Feb 05, 2013 at 11:27:19 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  no, but in the grand scheme of things, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VClib, PsychoSavannah

        "so, you approve of the content of his letter?"

        it's meaningless, since local sheriffs aren't charged with enforcing federal laws. blather for his stupid constituents.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (149)
  • Community (71)
  • Baltimore (68)
  • Bernie Sanders (49)
  • Freddie Gray (38)
  • Civil Rights (38)
  • Elections (27)
  • Hillary Clinton (27)
  • Culture (24)
  • Racism (23)
  • Education (20)
  • Labor (20)
  • Media (19)
  • Law (19)
  • Economy (19)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Science (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Politics (15)
  • Riots (14)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site