"I Will Swear In Tens of Thousands"

[Subdeacon Joe]

 

[Blackwater 53393]

I LIKE this guy!! 

[Rye Miles #13621]

This guy is awesome ! We need more like him!

[Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984]

So you get tens of thousands of undertrained, underpaid LEOs but who gets the hate when things go wrong?

[Ozark Huckleberry]

1 hour ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

So you get tens of thousands of undertrained, underpaid LEOs but who gets the hate when things go wrong?

I inferred from his comments the civilians sworn in would be ‘on call’ — maybe no specific powers unless activated, just a ‘requirement’ to be ready to respond with their own weapons if he called them to duty. 
 

In any case, a county sheriff is, in the final measure, a politician. I’d stick this in the file where I keep all the other politician promises. 

[J-BAR #18287]

3 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

So you get tens of thousands of undertrained, underpaid LEOs but who gets the hate when things go wrong?

 

Some folks think things are already going wrong.

[Blackwater 53393]

I’ve known a couple of sheriffs who would be likely to do the same thing!

[Subdeacon Joe]

3 hours ago, Ozark Huckleberry said:

I inferred from his comments the civilians sworn in would be ‘on call’ — maybe no specific powers unless activated, just a ‘requirement’ to be ready to respond with their own weapons if he called them to duty. 

 

Almost like the Unorganized Militia, isn't it?

[Capt. R. Hugh Kidnme]

12 hours ago, Marshal Mo Hare, SASS #45984 said:

So you get tens of thousands of undertrained, underpaid LEOs but who gets the hate when things go wrong?

You missed the point. He's not intending to use them in LEO functions. Just support (dispatch, traffic control, etc.....) functions, if even that will be required. He's playing a loophole in the system which allows his constituents to keep their (potentially banned)  firearms. 

[Pat Riot]

He’s right. A Sheriff can do this. 

[Blackwater 53393]

43 minutes ago, Pat Riot said:

He’s right. A Sheriff can do this. 

And in some places and cases, probably should!!

[Pat Riot]

2 hours ago, Blackwater 53393 said:

And in some places and cases, probably should!!

When I was a kid the Sheriff of the county we lived in made it known that any law abiding able bodied person that owned firearms could become a “Reserve Sheriffs Deputy”. All one had to do is go to the Sheriff’s office with their ID and fill out some paperwork then be fingerprinted and after a quick background check they would be sworn in as a reserve deputy. I believe were given a manual as well. 
He had a lot of reserve deputies.

I recall a day a guy got into an argument with my Dad at a local restaurant. I really can’t remember what the argument was about, but this guy jumps up whips out his wallet and says “I am an officer of the law! I am a reserve deputy!” A whole bunch of people started laughing, including my Dad. Some guy yelled out “Hey buddy, so is pretty much everybody in this place!” The guy turned and left. He looked a bit embarrassed. 
 

 

[Badlands Bob #61228]

I know every state is different.  In Georgia, a deputy sheriff can be appointed by the sheriff and must attend a Georgia Police Academy within one year of employment.  Major agencies will not let them act as a deputy sheriff until they actually graduate from the police academy.  There's no such thing as 1/2 sworn or a partial law enforcement officer under the law.  You're either authorized to carry firearms, make arrests and file charges, or you are not.  Civil liability would destroy this Sheriff's county the first time one of those untrained civilians acted under color of law.  Not to mention, that violating someone's rights while acting under color of law gets the attention of the Feds and 1983 civil suits.  

[Texas Joker]

And while I understand and respect what has become a profession with standards of training and best practices  I would ask why does an officer have any extra authority or protection from the law than any other citizen?

 

 

[Ozark Huckleberry]

22 hours ago, Texas Joker said:

I would ask why does an officer have any extra authority or protection from the law than any other citizen?

‘Any other citizen’ has the option of walking away from any fight. Sometimes, LEOs don’t. 
 

LEOs are still subject to prosecution for criminal misconduct. 

[Texas Joker]

Qualified immunity.

 

Yes an officer can be prosecuted but the default is not the case. 

 

If a citizen decides to intervene it is assumed that they are at fault. So much so that our civil liability stance is 'do not interfere with people breaking the law you'll get sued'

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

On 10/20/2023 at 8:06 AM, Texas Joker said:

  I would ask why does an officer have any extra authority or protection from the law than any other citizen?

 

Most states provide specific authority to commissioned law enforcement officers. The commission comes with significant training requirements and background clearances.

 

Regarded by most as better than all citizens having law enforcement authority. Shouldn't require too much explanation.

[Ozark Huckleberry]

On 10/21/2023 at 10:36 AM, Texas Joker said:

Qualified immunity.

 

Yes an officer can be prosecuted but the default is not the case. 

 

If a citizen decides to intervene it is assumed that they are at fault. So much so that our civil liability stance is 'do not interfere with people breaking the law you'll get sued'

There are some states which provide for citizen intervention in certain circumstances. For instance, in Florida:

 

776.012 Use or threatened use of force in defense of person.—

(2) A person is justified in using or threatening to use deadly force if he or she reasonably believes that using or threatening to use such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. A person who uses or threatens to use deadly force in accordance with this subsection does not have a duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground if the person using or threatening to use the deadly force is not engaged in a criminal activity and is in a place where he or she has a right to be.

 

Or Missouri, since that's where you're from:

 *563.031.  Use of force in defense of persons. — 1.  A person may, subject to the provisions of subsection 2 of this section, use physical force upon another person when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such force to be necessary to defend himself or herself or a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of unlawful force by such other person, unless: [list of conditions].

Can't say for Missouri, but in Florida, state law protects a citizen exercising lawful self-defense from civil liability.

 

When an officer intervenes, his or her actions are subject to scrutiny.

 

But I will agree to the frustration that the litigious society in the U.S. imposes on reasonable people taking care of business. Between the media's need to spin everything into ratings-boosting affronts, and the high-profile lawyers who parachute in when there's the slightest whiff of deep-pocket tort in the air, it's more rational for uninvolved third parties to just restrain themselves to being good witnesses if there's not a life on the line. 

[Texas Joker]

Not my point. The OP is talking about swearing in a posse, citizens sworn by the sherrif to do a duty he decides.

 

Folks act like he lost his mind because they aren't ''professional'' officers.  Cops are just people we pay to take on tough so we don't have to

 

I have family that have worked the road and are on duty now.

 

I have more training and education and security clearance than them. There's no reason I wouldn't serve if asked

[Subdeacon Joe]

16 minutes ago, Texas Joker said:

Not my point. The OP is talking about swearing in a posse, citizens sworn by the sherrif to do a duty he decides.

 

Folks act like he lost his mind because they aren't ''professional'' officers.  Cops are just people we pay to take on tough so we don't have to

 

I have family that have worked the road and are on duty now.

 

I have more training and education and security clearance than them. There's no reason I wouldn't serve if asked

 

Yes, in the very broadest sense he is forming a posse.   But in the way most people understand and use that word he is not.

"1: a large group often with a common interest

2: a body of persons summoned by a sheriff to assist in preserving the public peace usually in an emergency

3: a group of people temporarily organized to make a search (as for a lost child)

 

In that broadest sense, you could almost argue that almost the entire body of citizens, having the "common interest" of maintaining a peaceful and civil society, make up a posse.

 

I doubt that he envisions actually calling any of the reserve deputies he creates by this.

[Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619]

Well, if I ever get arrested, something I've avoided for 75 years, I hope it's by a commissioned law enforcement officer, not a posse. Especially one of those possies that has men on it who like to think about being on possies.

[Badlands Bob #61228]

6 hours ago, Red Gauntlet , SASS 60619 said:

Well, if I ever get arrested, something I've avoided for 75 years, I hope it's by a commissioned law enforcement officer, not a posse. Especially one of those possies that has men on it who like to think about being on possies.

That's sort of like getting tried by a group of people who weren't smart enough to get out of jury duty.