566
in my experience police do not like it when you dox them
it is especially true with secret police and ex police
Will I be banned for posting his address? He is a public employee so it's publicly available data
I say do it.
along with his salary
Fascist piece of shit. Also, I hate this fucking ridiculous argument they take up - that people that support immigration have to put them up in their houses, personally? WTAF?
I'll accept that if people who vote against abortion access are banned from having them
This would require that the government be able to retrieve your individual voting record, and then stand in the way of your healthcare based on how you vote. Sounds like a neofascist pipedream.
I, for one, don't accept your authoritarian proposal.
ohio democrats, here's what you do: buy guns.
Found the gun manufacturer!
Please tell me “condemned” is new slang for fired.
Nope, he'll probably be re-elected by a landslide
The most depressing thing about the last 9 years or so, apart from climate doom, is discovering that fascism turns out to be extremely popular.
Anyone else feel like we've returned to some era where people in positions of power no longer get punished? What the hap is fuckening?
We never really left that era, they were just good at hiding it for a while.
Is it illegal to just leave one in his yard that mysteriously replaced itself?
Genocide types like this absolutely have cameras watching their yards
load more comments
(8 replies)
I think this terrorist cop needs to spend some time in the state penitentiary
he won't. it's up to us to punish conservatives.
And this is why popular vote may not be a good way of choosing a sheriff. It produces some truly awful pick me candidates who are more interested in political power and grandstanding than serving their office.
Without a strong code of ethics backed up by the law people can get away with a lot of bullshit.
This guy should resign and if not then disbarred for his conduct. It boggles my mind that elected officials have no oversight. Instead he will probably face no repercussions for othering people and denigrating his office.
he won't resign and they will keep electing idiots like him. THEY are the problem, not the idiots that THEY vote in. the solutions are simple.
Honestly I would prefer it be an appointment but every election there should be a confidence vote where if at least 50% of people don't approve of them they get barred from office
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Condemned? Arrested.
If only
The Ohio secretary of state’s office said it did not plan to take any action. “Our office has determined the sheriff’s comments don’t violate election laws,” said Dan Lusheck, a spokesperson for Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose. “Elected officials are accountable to their constituents, and the sheriff can answer for himself about the substance of his remarks.”
Apparently threats and intimidation don't count as long as elections are involved.
it's really time we stopped marveling at humanity's slide into dystopia and do something about it, don't you agree?
load more comments
(1 replies)
What a chickenshit response.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Oohhh... Condemned... Absolutely no teeth
The entire sheriff's office got removed from providing security at a voting event. It's not actual election day stuff, at least not yet. But the city did send a message
At least it wasn't "slammed".
The next journalist to use that word will be slammed against a wall
This redditor claims his department is also harassing people after doubling down.
Ohio revised Code Section 2909.23 - Making terroristic threat
(A) No person shall threaten to commit or threaten to cause to be committed a specified offense when both of the following apply:
(1) The person makes the threat with purpose to do any of the following:
(a) Intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(b) Influence the policy of any government by intimidation or coercion;
(c) Affect the conduct of any government by the threat or by the specified offense.
(2) As a result of the threat, the person causes a reasonable expectation or fear of the imminent commission of the specified offense.
(B) It is not a defense to a charge of a violation of this section that the defendant did not have the intent or capability to commit the threatened specified offense or that the threat was not made to a person who was a subject of the threatened specified offense.
(C) Whoever violates this section is guilty of making a terroristic threat, a felony of the third degree. Section 2909.25 of the Revised Code applies regarding an offender who is convicted of or pleads guilty to a violation of this section.
R.C. §2909.23
. . . just sayin'.
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
566 points (99.1% liked)
politics
18904 readers
3603 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS