Sheriff Joe (Phoenix: residence, move, shop)

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by nthomas

Sheriff Joe should consider some rehabilitation in his jails just like the prisons in ARIZONA need so the population will drop. Why do the citizens in Phoenix keep reelecting a sheriff that has been sued so many times. Do they not realize what that money is costing the county?

First off, many of those in the County Jail are there for a VERY short period of time - often awaiting trial

Others are inmates for less than one year - anyone sentenced to more than a year, goes to the State Prision system.

What kind of "rehabilitation" would you suggest the County offer?

AND, to be honest, the lawsuits do not bother me in the least. Anyone can sue anyone else for almost anything

What I look at is the judgments that result from the lawsuits and, there are not that many at all against MCSO

Arpaio may be arrogant. He may be a media who.re. BUT, he is doing his job of law enforcement

THAT is why the citizens keep re-electing him - he is doing a good job

[Arizona Annie]

Originally Posted by Bummer

ONLY to a very closed (or criminal) mind, ibarrio

Granted, most of the Sheriffs and other Law Enforcement Leaders in Arizona are either rarely or never sued.

WHY? BECAUSE THEY DO NOTHING. They maintain "daycares" instead of slammers! They would prefer to tolerate crime against the citizens rather than arresting and arranging for deportation the largest criminal element in the state. They remain "low key" and "neutral" for job security.

As I have posted before . . . Arizona, as well as the entire country, would be a better place to live if there were more Sheriff Joe's.

I understand what you are saying Bummer. I agree with you. In fact the fact that they are so soft on certain crimes and certain criminals is why we recently lost yet another officer and could have lost another one if he wasn't wearing a bullet proof vest. Some people hate Sheriff Joe because he is so tough with criminals. People like him for the same reason.

[ibarrio]

ONLY to a very closed (or criminal) mind, ibarrio

All you can do is insinuate things that are not true. Call me a crook, close minded...Whatever...Still will not support this man.

You present zero arguments to support you opinion...all you do is name call.

Show some evidence to back up your claims...

They remain "low key" and "neutral" for job security.

If this was true then Joe would have been out of a job long ago...

Do your research to back up your feelings...otherwise you are just blowing hot air.

And please show me where I said that I support crooks and criminals? I support our rights as citizens of the United States..obviously you do not and are eager to give them away. Very weak minded in my opinion.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by ibarrio

All you can do is insinuate things that are not true. Call me a crook, close minded...Whatever...Still will not support this man.

The "man" is doing his job - he is tough on crime, and criminals. IMO, that is a good thing. Also, it does appear it is also the feeling of a great majority of the citizenry as well -

[ibarrio]

And I'm glad he is tough on crime..and the people in Tent city deserve it...but he abuses his powers and crosses the line with people who speak out or stand up to him...not a good thing...

And when he threatens to remove rights of Americans citizens he is abusing his powers..that is why the County Attorney dropped the case..bravo to him for not playing Joe's game.

Edit to add. The Rampart police in Los Angeles did a very good job at fighting crime...Read up on the cases. The had all the bad guys afraid of them...and how did that end? Abuse of Police powers never ends good, it often ends with the officers becoming what they loathe...

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by ibarrio

And I'm glad he is tough on crime..and the people in Tent city deserve it...but he abuses his powers and crosses the line with people who speak out or stand up to him...not a good thing...

Will you be as harsh on Police Chief Jack Harris (Phx PD) who is lashing out at those to speak out against him?

[ibarrio]

Will you be as harsh on Police Chief Jack Harris (Phx PD) who is lashing out at those to speak out against him?

Start a thread on him and I will do my research. If he is as blatant as Joe then yes...

I support police officers (come from a family full of them...customs, border patrol, police officers, and under cover DEA). None of them would support Joe and his agenda...Joe doesn't even have the support of his own deputies!

Police officers associations throughout the State of Arizona have voted "no confidence" in Joe Arpaio as Sheriff! These include; State of Arizona Fraternal Order of Police, Fraternal Order of Police Lodge Five, Maricopa County Deputies Association, Arizona Cops.

[Arizona Annie]

Originally Posted by Arizona Annie

Please explain. I have no idea how you figure I got caught with my foot in my mouth. Did you read my response completely?

It was not my intent to be spiteful either.

Still waiting Ibarrio......or was it your intent to hit and run?

[ibarrio]

You put your foot in your mouth when you called me out on something that was not true...a truth you later claimed to know.

Why say I spy when you know that web pages log that info...and that info is private? Not only did you say I spy but called me a hypocrite. It becomes a violation and spying when you use a grand jury subpoena to get that info...it becomes spying and a crime when a hacker uses his skills to break in and steal that info.

[Arizona Annie]

Originally Posted by ibarrio

You put your foot in your mouth when you called me out on something that was not true...a truth you later claimed to know.

Why say I spy when you know that web pages log that info...and that info is private? Not only did you say I spy but called me a hypocrite. It becomes a violation and spying when you use a grand jury subpoena to get that info...it becomes spying and a crime when a hacker uses his skills to break in and steal that info.

I agreed it is automatically tracked. However, it is automatically tracked by the server. As I said before, the domain owner does not have to use the option to obtain that information. You said, you have access to the information on your website, which means you opted for the option to receive it. I didn't. I felt it was an invasion of privacy (spying on people who visited my website) I still believe that. It was none of my business what site they came from and what site they went to next.

Your own quote.....

As an owner and operator/designer of a website I will tell that I do have access this this info on my website. My website logs the IP, the referring website, the website you went to after you left, how long you were on my website, which pages you visited while you were on my website, which browser you used, which country you come from, and so on...

You claim it is not true you were spying. Then please explain how it is different if you get the same information that was requested by law enforcement and you felt that was spying. Double standard or hypocrisy, you choose. I don't buy that it is only spying (to use your words) "when you use a grand jury subpoena to get that info...it becomes spying and a crime when a hacker uses his skills to break in and steal that info." I believe it's also spying when you request that information from the server. That is my opinion.

I also want to say that I don't mean to be picking on you. After all, it's not like you are the only one getting that information. It's just that you were so adamant about their spying and yet you admitted getting the same information yourself. I just wanted to know why you felt it was fine for you to do it, but not law enforcement.