Sheriff Joe (Phoenix: job, crime, retirement)

[doublet]

Originally Posted by aj661

"practically out of state"?

Are Mexicans exempt from the law requiring an adequate windshield? I think a more accurate statement would be the officer pulled over a car with a cracked windshield that happened to be driven by a Mexican.

Oh, yeah. Racial profiling NEVER happens!

[irwin]

Originally Posted by LivinInLaveen

Sheriff Joe is at least doing something to get tough. He isn’t willing to compromise. And all the “what about criminal’s rights” liberals are ready to give the criminals all that we law abiding citizens work so hard for….Freedom from crime. This is part the problem with society today, we think that we are forced sit back and accept what is going on around us and compromise our safety and peace of mind for a little piece of the American dream. The police departments
We all need to wake up, band together and do something to take our communities back from the criminal element that live among all of us. We, as a country need to stop tolerating this behavior and get tougher on criminals period. And Sheriff Joe is doing something to help. I don’t care where they came from legal or illegal

Whenever I read this kind of thing I have to just shake my head. It shows the sad state of our education system in civics and government.

Well, all I can say is that the US Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights, is there to guarantee individual rights, not some kind of collective right you seem to be advocating for. In fact, the very concept of collective rights is completely counter to what the Bill of Rights stands for. If want a society where there are collective rights, which is used to crush the rights of the individual, perhaps you should turn to China or the former USSR. They justified all kinds of legislation in the name of preserving society's security and the publics' right to peace.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by tablemtn

Anyhow, why IS the crime rate so high in Phoenix, and Arizona in general? Arizona's murder rate, for example, is MUCH higher than the national average, and is one of the highest in the nation. Why doesn't 'Sheriff Joe' crack down on crime? Why is he so soft on crime, as evidenced by the high crime rates? Remember, being 'hard on CRIME' may require a lot more than merely being hard on some CRIMINALS who happen to be captured. Being hard on CRIME, as opposed to merely the criminals your department is able to catch, means reducing crime rates and making the whole city safe at all hours of the night.

Please keep in mind, Sheriff Arpaio has authority in the un-incorporated portions of Maricopa County.

The City of Phoenix Police Department is reponsible for crime within the City of Phoenix.

Your ire is being directed towards the wrong person and the wrong department

[ibarrio]

Great Man the Sheriff is...

And this is coming off KTAR, a heavy Sheriff Joe Supporter.

About the alleged racial profiling incident, Pace said, ``Sheriff Joe has actually said to a waittress who came up to serve him his breakfast -- she had olive skin and she spoke with an accent -- and he said, `Are you legal?' -- right at the breakfast table at a restaurant. And she looked at him offended and said, `Yes, and I'm Jewish.' And then he slammed her and said, `Why would you be working here then?'"

She would not reveal more because she said the woman is afraid to come forward.

Link to Story

[California Yanqui]

Originally Posted by ibarrio

Great Man the Sheriff is...

And this is coming off KTAR, a heavy Sheriff Joe Supporter.




Link to Story

LMAO, another slandereous statement, and unverified hearsay from a third party that is suing the county in the interest of the "business community"

Julie Pace, who represents businesses in a court challenge to the law, said she also knows of one incident in which Sheriff Joe Arpaio himself was involved in racial profiling, and she's considering legal action against the sheriff.

[ibarrio]

LMAO, another slandereous statement, and unverified hearsay from a third party that is suing the county in the interest of the "business community

"

Yeah..because the Sheriff can do no wrong or make such comments.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by Greatday

Please keep in mind, Sheriff Arpaio has authority in the un-incorporated portions of Maricopa County.

The City of Phoenix Police Department is reponsible for crime within the City of Phoenix.

Your ire is being directed towards the wrong person and the wrong department

It's interesting to me how Sheriff Joe's supporters often want to have it both ways when it comes to defining the jurisdiction of the MCSO.

When high crime rates are cited as evidence of the ineffectiveness of Sheriff Joe's policies, defenders of the Sheriff are quick to point out that the MCSO provides primary law enforcement only in unincorporated areas of the county and small communities that contract with the MCSO to serve as their police force. In Phoenix and most of its suburbs, primary law enforcment is handled by municipal police forces.

That's fine -- except that the Sheriff's supporters seem to have no problem with his mounting high-profile operations within Phoenix City limits -- not just crackdowns on illegal immigrants, but also prostitution stings along Van Buren, corruption investigations that generally lead nowhere, and numerous other incursions into the turf of the Phoenix PD and other law enforcement agencies. If the Sheriff is operating throughout the entire metro area, including Phoenix City limits, shouldn't he then be accountable for citywide crime rates?

The question, then: Is Sheriff Joe constrained to a limited set of responsibilities that include unincorporated areas of the county, small communities, and the jails -- or is he supposed to be the czar of all law enforcement in the Phoenix Metro Area? Personally, I'd prefer the former role, but Sheriff Joe and many of his supporters seem to want it to be both ways depending on which answer is better for the Sheriff.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by silverbear

It's interesting to me how Sheriff Joe's supporters often want to have it both ways when it comes to defining the jurisdiction of the MCSO.

When high crime rates are cited as evidence of the ineffectiveness of Sheriff Joe's policies, defenders of the Sheriff are quick to point out that the MCSO provides primary law enforcement only in unincorporated areas of the county and small communities that contract with the MCSO to serve as their police force. In Phoenix and most of its suburbs, primary law enforcment is handled by municipal police forces.

That's fine -- except that the Sheriff's supporters seem to have no problem with his mounting high-profile operations within Phoenix City limits -- not just crackdowns on illegal immigrants, but also prostitution stings along Van Buren, corruption investigations that generally lead nowhere, and numerous other incursions into the turf of the Phoenix PD and other law enforcement agencies. If the Sheriff is operating throughout the entire metro area, including Phoenix City limits, shouldn't he then be accountable for citywide crime rates?

The question, then: Is Sheriff Joe constrained to a limited set of responsibilities that include unincorporated areas of the county, small communities, and the jails -- or is he supposed to be the czar of all law enforcement in the Phoenix Metro Area? Personally, I'd prefer the former role, but Sheriff Joe and many of his supporters seem to want it to be both ways depending on which answer is better for the Sheriff.

MCSO, when operating in these rare hi profile stings, are "invited" / asked to help, by local law enforcement.

Perhaps you were unaware of that

[sablebaby]

Hey guys, chill out already.

[silverbear]

Originally Posted by Greatday

MCSO, when operating in these rare hi profile stings, are "invited" / asked to help, by local law enforcement.

Perhaps you were unaware of that

Actually, in many cases, the MCSO is not invited and sometimes even works at cross purposes with local law enforcement. Nevertheless, regardless of whether the MCSO is invited or not, there is a fundamental inconsistency that needs to be resolved: Either the MCSO operates throughout the metro area and is accountable for overall crime rates or the MCSO sticks to a limited mission and is therefore not accountable for overall crime rates. Either position would be consistent, but it seems that the Sheriff and his supporters want to mix the two mutually exclusive positions to suit the Sheriff's needs.