467
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

Summary

"Constitutional sheriffs" are a group of law enforcement officials who believe they hold supreme authority in their counties and can disregard state and federal law.

These sheriffs have become prominent figures in the election denial movement, and some have taken actions that critics view as dangerous, such as attempting to seize voting machine, assembling armed posses to patrol near polling stations, and refusing to enforce any law they view to be unconstitutional.

The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association, led by Richard Mack, has bolstered the movement, attracting sheriffs nationwide and featuring prominent election denial figures like Mike Lindell and Michael Flynn at their events

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 50 points 2 weeks ago

I’d say worse, the SovCit people are ridiculous idiots but mostly just try to get out paying debts or traffic laws, these “sheriffs” are actively attempting to thwart democracy and should be hurled into the nearest prison for at least the next election cycle to think about what they did.

[-] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago

They’re all trying to do an end-run around democracy and society, it’s just a different level of power they believe they have.

Sov cits want it for themselves

These sheriffs want it for elections.

More dangerous, sure, but the same basic principle of “I can manipulatively read and misunderstand the rules so that they don’t apply to me”

[-] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago

Also both the constitutional sherriffs and sovcits grew out of the militia movement of the 80s and 90s. They are basically the same movement just different aspects of it.

[-] pinkystew@reddthat.com 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Nope, these sheriffs do not "want it for elections", they want it for themselves. We're on the same side here and I'm sorry to be antagonistic but I don't agree with you excusing their behavior as principled in any way unless you also do it for sovereign citizens, because it is exactly the same thing: "the rules only apply to me when it's convenient."

[-] ArbiterXero@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Yes, I think you misunderstood what I meant, I think we’re saying the same thing.

They both are “manipulatively reading the rules” to make the rules seem say something that gives them more power than they have and zero responsibility to their neighbour, city, state or country

Same basic principle of “things mean what I want them to mean”

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

The way I see it, sovcits want it for themselves to have freedom to do what they want (which can include imposing on others). "Constitutional" sheriffs want it for themselves to expand their power over others because police can do very well under a fascist system (until they do something against the party and then disappear... Or someone more connected in the party wants their power themselves... Or someone less connected wants their power and can act before the better connections come into play).

I wonder how many of the ones who want a fascist system for their own power realize how much of a target getting that power puts on them from pretty much all sides.

this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
467 points (99.4% liked)

News

23301 readers
1311 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS