Arizona Judge Tells Sheriff "Reveal Password Or Face Contempt" 624
An anonymous reader writes "Four days ago, deputies from the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office in Arizona conducted a raid against the county government building hosting computers for a law enforcement database. After threatening to arrest county employees who would stop them, the officers proceeded to secure the room and promptly changed passwords on many of the servers. In a hearing on Friday, a Superior Court judge threatened to hold members of the Sheriff's Office in contempt if they did not reveal the passwords by next Wednesday. Following this, the Sheriff's Office claimed to be conducting an investigation against other Superior Court judges. Courts have asked for passwords before, but never under conditions like this."
On behalf of arizona... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
I firmly believe he's a sociopath.
All he does is treat criminals as if they are sub-human and their dignity is his personal property. Besides, there seems to be an approximate consensus among the Maricopa anglo population people convicted of a crime aren't human beings, so clearly it's not sociopathic.
/sarcasm
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Physical Security (Score:5, Insightful)
Rule #3 of the 10 Immutable Laws of Security [microsoft.com]: if a bad guy has unrestricted physical access to your computer, it's not your computer anymore.
Story should serve as a good reminder to everyone out there that in the end, no amount of encryption, biometrics, or obscurity will protect your network when a hacker brings a gun. Physical security trumps all.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:0, Insightful)
Are you fucking batshit? Arpaio is among the only SANE Sheriffs in the US.
Our prisoners should be treated like prisoners. They should not have better food and TV than I have. If you don't like that some people are wrongly incarcerated, fix THAT. Don't expect me to continue paying taxes so that the local rapist can have 400 HD channels + OnDemand while he's locked up.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
He's not going to have any fun with the federal government. DHS is now headed by Janet Napolitano. For those that don't know she was the governor of Arizona (and a fairly popular one) until she was appointed to head DHS. She also hates Arpaio for his tactics and flaunting of the law. As such you can bet DHS is going to be on his ass about any and everything they can.
There is a lesson here about stepping on toes that might be connected to an ass you later have to kiss.
I've lived in Maricopa County for over 20 years, (Score:5, Insightful)
...and the Sheriff's Office has been a joke for almost all of them. Sheriff Joe's predecessor utterly botched an investigation into a high-profile mass murder at a local Buddhist Temple, so voters here were looking for change at any price.
I'm pro-law and order, but law and order means, well, law AND order, not Sheriff Joe's thuggery. He's cost the county millions in unnecessary lawsuits for brutality in his jails, his law enforcement tactics exist solely to grab headlines and intimidate his opponents and he's ruined inter-agency cooperation in Central Arizona for at least the near future.
The sooner we elect someone else, the better off we'll be.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:0, Insightful)
As a law abiding citizen, if I lived in Maricopa County, I would seriously consider shooting him too.
Re:That's why the US isn't a democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
If you want to change the country, the simplest way to do so is to change what the populace wants.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:4, Insightful)
She also hates Arpaio for his tactics and flaunting of the law.
I thought it was pretty much a sheriff's job to flaunt the law? Oh, unless you mean "flout"... (this isn't spelling or grammar, it's semantics -- you may want to extend your sig).
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
There's a difference between not "coddling" prisoners and abuse, not to mention the fact that the jail houses not only people convicted of crimes but those awaiting trial, who have not been convicted of anything and should not give up any rights except to the extent necessary to keep them from leaving the jurisdiction. In any case, although he is Mr. Law-and-Order when it comes to immigration, as this case shows he is power hungry and doesn't abide by the law unless it suits him. If you've got a civil dispute with another branch of government, you don't resolve it by sending armed thugs to take control by force.
Re:Arpaio (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't count on that. Ol' Joe's survived many attempts to remove him from office.
What I'm wondering is, will Hendershott be sentenced to one of Joe's tent cities, or will they give him one of the many vacant air conditioned cells in the 'real' Maricopa County jail, the one that Joe refuses to use? Personally, I'd vote for tent city...
Re:That's why the US isn't a democracy (Score:3, Insightful)
Every sheriff's office and police department in the US has, at one point or another, been successfully sued for "rights violations" at some point. Making a blanket statement like that means nothing.
Arpaio is also very clear on making prison as UN-palatable an option as possible to criminals. If you subscribe to the theory that some portion of the population considers the possible consequences of their actions (in other words, is a rational actor [wikipedia.org]), then this should result in reduced initial crime rates from that portion of the population. If you don't subscribe to rational choice theory, then your opinion may be different.
Of course, there is a portion of the population that are (temporarily or permanently) mentally incapable of either (A) recognizing the possible outcomes of their actions or (B) believing they will be caught. This strains their calculation to the point where they commit crimes anyways. Society has decided that these people are to be punished and "rehabilitated" (hopefully, taught NOT to break the law in the future). Depending on where you live and what judge you get, the harshness of this varies. Where I live, we have a hell of a lot of revolving-door "petty" criminals who commit "nonviolent" thefts from government/school buildings, always surrender when the cops show up, and then spend 3-4 months as a "trustee" in minimum-security each time before coming right out the revolving door and offending all over again. They don't see the system as a punishment at all. If you're to believe they are "rational actors" (and I have no reason to believe otherwise, based on televised interviews), then the lack of perceived punishment indicates that the system is broken, and I have to suspect that at least some of them would be more receptive to changing their lifestyles if "prison" meant something other than 3 hot meals a day, air conditioning, free cable TV, free library, free access to gym equipment, zero rent, and more.
The people of Maricopa County, by and large, have said they want their Sheriff to be harsh on inmates. Double-digit reelection seems to be an indicator of this, at least. The fact that he, following the indications of his reelection that his methods are supported, butts heads with people who believe otherwise is no surprise at all.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:1, Insightful)
i wasn't aware that it was legal to take over a govt. agency by force, and to do so while there is an active lawsuit underway, and then to ignore a court order. You learn something new every day.
Re:Arpaio (Score:1, Insightful)
Where is the Attorney General of Arizona in all this? Presumably he, not a county sheriff is the chief law enforcement official in Arizona.
Re:Phoenix should be nuked from Orbit (Score:0, Insightful)
The new racist south extends from the I-10 in Phoenix through the whole Southern US now.
Ahhh. So you don't like him enforcing immigration laws, then. I see. Explains a lot.
Re:How did they get control of the servers? (Score:3, Insightful)
Is it much harder now? Especially when you have access to the hardware.
Actually both 2003 and 2008 have the ability to be exceedingly hard. 2008 moreso than 2003. But in my experience the vast majority servers are very very rarely configured to make it hard.
With a vanilla set up, they are relatively easy **with physical access**.
Coverup (Score:5, Insightful)
This just screams coverup.
Sherrif Joe is afraid of the information on those servers ... why? It would be nice to know, wouldn't it? Streisand Effect, anyone?
The county should turn it all over to the FBI for forensic investigation after this. I don't care who you are, unauthorized access to a computer system is a felony in most states and a federal offense, too.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:1, Insightful)
It might be that if more jails/prisons were run this way, we might have fewer return trips. I wonder what his repeat statistics are in comparison to other places that run taxpayer funded country clubs.
What is it about the words -Criminal- and -Illegal- alien that is so hard for slashdotters to fathom.
I dont think that prisoners should have access to TV or weight lifting equipment or be allowed to form gangs or get drugs while in prison. I suspect those activities are pretty limited under his command.
If it is so demeaning to dignity to be in jail, sobeit. It should NOT be a badge of honor like it is treated.
I am not against immigration or work permits but I am against paying for (via taxes) medical and infrastructure expenses for those who do not contribute and merely send money out of the country. If they pay their fair share and are here legally, good on them and they are welcome.
(so much for karma in this thread)
Re:That's why the US isn't a democracy (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually, according to the Constitution (10th Amendment) [gpoaccess.gov]:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution,
nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people."
Since the US Constitution says nothing about prisons save for prohibiting "cruel and unusual punishment", as long as Arpaio does not cross the line into "cruel", harshness is definitely allowed. Arizona's constitution [azleg.gov] says nothing about prisons. Arizona's law (a href="http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ArizonaRevisedStatutes.asp?Title=31">Title 31) deals with prisons and the duties of Sheriffs, but within those provisions, counties have quite a wide latitude on how lenient/harsh they wish to be.
I hope you have learned something today.
bizare turn of events (Score:2, Insightful)
I always thought that law enforcement was supposed to be the arm of the government. It seems more like the arm is acting of its own accord in this case.
Let me fix that for you (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:4, Insightful)
"It might be" -- well, there should be statistics. Does he have lower return rates on his prisoners, or is it just wishful thinking on his constituents' part?
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's really all that needs to be said of Arpaio, and since it's the first instance of the statement, it's the most insightful post in the story.
Re:That's why the US isn't a democracy (Score:5, Insightful)
Not from you. Nothing you've said is inconsistent with what I said. The prohibition of "cruel and unusual" punishment in the US Constitution plays a larger role than its three words might suggest. And by the way, the clause doesn't have to mention the word "prison" to be relevant. Due process rights, for example, play an important role in determining what prison officials can and cannot do. And the people who have those rights reserved to the people include prisoners.
Re:Arpaio (Score:5, Insightful)
Dostoyevsky said that any society can be judged by the way it treats its prisoners. I sure as hell don't want this man standing as a representative of our civilization.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would you think prison was about rehabilitation? Prison terms are specified by the crime committed, not by the estimation of the time required for sufficient behavior modification.
Re:Let me fix that for you (Score:5, Insightful)
Thus I would suspect that a large portion of his constituency are woefully ignorant of his policies.
No.
Sad to say, but my experience has taught me that many people are fully capable of supporting human rights violations so long as they're happening to "the other", and not them. Whether that other is criminals / suspects, immigrants (legal or not), or simply another race doesn't matter; it means that they are on a slightly higher footing in society due to Sheriff Joe's actions. And that makes them feel good.
And in a county where a sheriff is elected, it results in laws and the enforcement thereof skewed toward that irrational majority.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Physical Security (Score:2, Insightful)
Law #6: A computer is only as secure as the administrator is trustworthy
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:1, Insightful)
Some Americans actually agree with what's inscribed on the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Prison about rehabilitation? Hahahahahaa!!!! Not hardly. Prison (not to be confused with Jail, which is different) is about keeping the baddies away from the rest of society so we can be safe. It's about punishment. Rehabilitation is a myth. The number that are rehabilitated is so small that it would probably be the same number if you didn't put ANYONE in prison. The proof that it is about punishment and keeping people away from society is the sentencing guidelines for different crimes, such as selling drugs, rape, child porn, etc.
Not that sentencing guidelines are rational though - drug dealers usually get heavier penalties than child rapists, at least in my area.
Re:That's why the US isn't a democracy (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that our immigration laws are largely set up by xenophobes a lot like you. They make it nearly impossible to legally immigrate, so what do you expect? When you have unjust laws, you shouldn't expect people to respect them. This same kind of thing happened during the prohibition era too. But do people really learn? Not really.
One thing that the anti-immigrant crowd do miss is that a lot of them are holding jobs using assumed SSNs, and taxes are withheld. They don't bother to file to get those withholdings back.
Re:California isn't any better. (Score:5, Insightful)
I heard a very interesting story Friday about how the Correctional Officers Union (or whatever it's called), a while ago, lobbied for things like "three strikes" laws. As result of their passage, the prison population has skyrocketed, many of them for non-violent offenses. A skyrocketing prison population heralded a huge increase in the number of correctional officers required to keep things in order. 10% of these officers make more than $100K per year (70% of the state's correctional budget of $10 billion goes toward salaries).
The union now boasts more than 45,000 members, and wields significant influence in the political arena. The sad part is that only 5% of the budget is available for rehabilitation, and consequentially, the recidivism rate has also skyrocketed. The California prison system has become a self-sustaining money pit, with much of funds going into the pockets of union members. Under the current system, there's no way out.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it about the words -Criminal- and -Illegal- alien that is so hard for slashdotters to fathom.
I know exactly what they mean. I also have a working understanding of the term "universal human dignity." If you want to put a man away for comitting a crime, then do it. But to break a man, to force him to eat moldy food and to sexually humiliate him, let alone reward the state for doing it, is an altogether different thing. Absolute power over others corrupts absolutely; you let cops do awful things to people in jail, and I guarantee that eventually that's how they'll treat people on the outside, too. In this most recent case, they simply invaded a government building and staged a coup -- the police's attitude toward their responsibility as upholders of public trust has been destroyed by their chief's blatant disregard for the law in deference to his political prerogatives and his belief that his role in society is to be an arbiter of violence.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it about the words "cruel and unusual punishments" that is so hard for you to fathom?
Prisons aren't about punishments or retribution or degradation. They're about removing criminals from the society they threaten, and rehabilitating them if possible.
How we treat our inmates reflects more on us than on them. If we have no qualms about doing things to inmates for the express purpose of stripping them of their dignity and humanity, it is because we have already lost ours.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
I recall Jim Crow laws being popular in some states too.
Re:bizare turn of events (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't be so sure about the feds' ability to do anything about the sheriff. The structure of our governmental system puts the sheriff in a pretty good position. From a column I found with a brief search:
"...the sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county. Within that jurisdiction - inside his county - the sheriff has more power than the governor of his state. Indeed, the sheriff has more power in his county than the President of the United States. In his county, he can overrule the President and kick his people out. Remember, the President has few and limited powers."
Personally, if a real conservative were to be elected President, I'd like to see Sheriff Joe heading up Homeland Security.
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:5, Insightful)
If you lived in his area of jurisdiction, you'd understand.
Then how does he keep getting re-elected? I have heard many accusations against Sheriff Joe Arpaio, but I don't recall anyone suggesting that he has committed election fraud. That means that the majority of people who live in his jurisdiction who are both eligible to vote and care enough to vote support Joe Arpaio.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
What is it about the words -Criminal- and -Illegal- alien that is so hard for slashdotters to fathom.
It sounds like the sheriff must have broken a law here. But I don't see you, retiredtwice, saying that this sheriff, who has probably done something -Illegal-, should be charged and held as a prisoner until his trial. I'd say it's illegal to raid a law abiding office, to kidnap personnel (i.e. force them to act against their will), to torment law abiding, to commandeer property not your own, and to modify government computers without authorization. Why are you not up in arms about these illegal activities? I can tell you why: because it doesn't matter to *YOU* what crimes someone commits when *YOU* think that someone promotes *YOUR* own distorted ideological agenda. You need to take a look in the mirror. Your morals are corrupt, retiredtwice.
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:California isn't any better. (Score:4, Insightful)
Great example of conflict of interest... add in that somewhere around half our prisons are now run by for-profit corporations that get paid about $25k per warm body BY THE STATE (out of YOUR TAX DOLLARS) and it's clear that it's in their best interests if as many people are criminals and prison-bound as possible. To maximize profits, lobby for laws that everyone will break!!
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, the best way to judge any society is to see how they treat their jail prison population.
See, no justice system is infallible. Just look at the number of death row inmates who have been cleared after spending decades behind bars. Are the people who say "we should treat them like shit so they don't want to come back" really willing to put their money where their mouth is and volunteer to spend say six months doing hard time for a crime they didn't commit? How about a year? Five? Ten? Twenty?
We shouldn't treat inmates as if they're pond scum and that we, as a society, would be better off if they were on the compost heap instead of in prison. Sure, quite a lot of the people we throw behind bars end up committing some kind of crime while behind bars, be it doing drugs, breaking the prison rules, violence etc., but what are you supposed to do, if you're the innocent guy? Just let someone shank you? Rape you? Beat you up? Or are you going to try to fight back?
We may not like the people behind bars, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't treat them as human beings.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:1, Insightful)
The anti-immigration fans tend to forget a rather important thing: How did they end up here? I don't mean the new immigrants - I mean the fans.
Unless they are of native American stock, they themselves are either immigrants or descendent from immigrants. And if it's the latter, there's a good chance that their own lineage was a rather violent one - after all, they were the original ones that 'came over here and stole the jobs and the country'.
America for Americans? Sure - but where are all the white people going to go then?
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, that's pretty much the sad truth of it. He has a rabid fanbase who absolutely love him because he mistreats his prisoners. Note, of course, that he runs a jail, not a prison. The distinction being that many of the people he's mistreating have not yet been convicted of any crime. Some, in fact, may not have even been charged with anything yet.
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:2, Insightful)
Has anyone noticed how often meth is involved in medical reports about the deaths of his prisoners. It seems like a strange statistical anomaly to me.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Nope it's not torture, in fact it's business as usual for some of the soldiers stationed in Iraq.
Re:Mods, please be responsible. (Score:4, Insightful)
How does Arpaio saddle journalists with FAIO requests? Such requests are made to the government. Journalists are not the government.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:3, Insightful)
"You're a moron. Or an American."
He was describing the reality of the situation, not advocating a position. From what I've seen his post is accurate. If you would look past your anti-Americanism for a moment you would see that.
"Try taking a look at some actual civilized countries, like those in Europe"
It's a mixed bag. I would not want the USA to emulate Serbia or Romania, but hey, to each his own.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
Prison rape is an especially sickening concept.
The idea we can't stop crime in prison is idiotic. If people are even intimidating other people in prison, said intimidates should have their ability to interact with other prisoners revoked until they've learned their damn lesson.(1)
Hey, assholes, we put you in prison because you can't follow the law, you think running around threatening people, aka, committing felony assault, is going to fly?
Apparently, the answer is yes, and we've decided the prisoners 'deserve' whatever happens to them, and for some reason have failed to grasp what that actually means is we are allowing violent convicted criminals to continue to have fun. Forget a damn TV, how about we deny them the pleasure of raping someone? We don't even let innocent people rape people!
1) And, for all this talk about 'prison overcrowding', I suspect prison populations would be a lot easier to maintain, even more of them, if we'd simply move the 10% that cause the problems to solitary confinement until they stop causing damn problems.
In a perfect world... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:On behalf of everyone else... (Score:3, Insightful)
The proper course of action is to obtain a warrant from a court. The article indicates that the state courts have refused him access. Either the state court system itself is corrupt, which is possible but not that likely, or he's wrong. In any case, corruption in the justice system usually involves federal offenses as well as state ones (since, e.g., they are violating somebody's civil rights), so if the state courts don't work, he could try a federal court.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
Citations? I know the crime rates tend to drop when honest citizens are allowed to carry weapons. I know crime rates tend to rise when the right of honest citizens to defend themselves is impaired.
I DO NOT know that corrupt government officials tend to reduce crime. Put up, or shut up, please.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:1, Insightful)
"I know the crime rates tend to drop when honest citizens are allowed to carry weapons."
Please compare then murders in Japan (where honest citizens are not allowed to carry weapons) to those of Texas (where honest citizens are allowed to carry weapons).
"I know crime rates tend to rise when the right of honest citizens to defend themselves is impaired."
I know crime rates tend to low when we as a society allow our citizenship to grow as honest people and -just in case, lethal weapons are not easily gotten, neither by honest nor by dishonest citizens.
Worldwide statistics seem to support my point of view and reject yours.
"I DO NOT know that corrupt government officials tend to reduce crime. Put up, or shut up, please."
During Franco's dictatorship certainly crime rates where lower than now -as well as civil liberties, of course.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:5, Insightful)
By turning a blind eye to illegal immigration you are fostering an evironment which allows employers to continue to have unsafe working conditions and pay below-market wages. If these people were not present in the US, these employers would either have to move to Mexico and employ local people or pay US citizens real wages.
Why do you think prices at fast food restaurants have pretty much been frozen for 30 years? Because their labor costs have not increased.
Why is it that we have 10, 15 or even 20% unemployment in areas of the US with high populations of undocumented workers? Because it is cheaper to pay these people than legal workers, even when the employers are fined. If we had stronger employment verification laws, like E-Verify, we just might have significantly less unemployment among US citizens and legal workers. Instead, we are continuing to create an environment where we are importing cheap labor to be abused. Then, as we continue to see from the current administration, we are going to give them all an amnesty so they can be a permanent underclass - that will vote for their amnesty sponsors.
This isn't a good way to run a country or a labor force. Having illegal, underpaid and abused workers available to displace legal workers just means we are going to be paying more in unemployment and welfare for the legal workers. While the illegals actually are out there working. Doesn't sound right or even like a sensible policy. The answer is not to make them legal in hopes they then will deserve (and get) higher wages and less abuse. The answer is to make it less attractive to stay and to stop importing these low-wage workers.
Who will do the work then? Well, when there is 20% unemployment plenty of people will line up for jobs. And in cases where the pay is too low and the abuse too much, maybe the employers will either relocate elsewhere or decide to improve conditions. Leaving the illegals in place does nothing except continue the existing practices indefinately. The amnesty in 1986 didn't change anything in this regard and the amnesty in 2009 will not change anything either. Except maybe providing a new crop of grateful Democrat voters.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
Please compare then murders in Japan (where honest citizens are not allowed to carry weapons) to those of Texas (where honest citizens are allowed to carry weapons).
Yeah, because there are no other differences between Japan and Texas.
I know crime rates tend to low when we as a society allow our citizenship to grow as honest people and -just in case, lethal weapons are not easily gotten, neither by honest nor by dishonest citizens.
Go outside. pick of a good-sized rock. That's a lethal weapon. Pick up a branch. Lethal weapon. Etc, etc. Almost ANYTHING can be a lethal weapon if used by the right person. Sure, granny might not able to kill you with a rock, but a muscular 20-year old could easily do so.
Guns, on the other hand, even the playing field. Yes, a muscular 20-year old might shoot you, but granny can use the gun to protect herself, too.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:5, Insightful)
And they used "guns" to do threaten public employees. That they ARE public employees makes no difference. They obviously didn't have a warrant from a judge and they threatened law abiding employees in a different department.
Like it or not "law enforcement" is JUST A JOB!!!!! They are no different than any other public employee when dealing with matters like this... BOFH is going to have fun with them.... but if they were smart they'd walk away from their jobs Monday and file civil rights and workplace violence suits against their employers. Not to mention criminal charges with the state police/FBI for hijacking a computer system. Tampering with a public computer system alone ought to get the police 10-20 years!!!
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:4, Insightful)
It can be put more succinctly:
Some societies knowingly sentence their criminals to be gang-raped.
Others don't.
rj
Re:bizare turn of events (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd like to see a sadistic murderer sociopath who has no respect for the Constitution or our nation to be the Secretary of Homeland Security? Really?
Then again, you also seem to hate the Constitution pretty strongly, since you have ignored the Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Section 2), which states:
Sure, the WordPress site you link says differently. It's nonetheless wrong - perhaps you should learn not to take your legal advice from blogs created by people who hate law? As the judge in the case you are referring to, Castaneda v. U.S., states [uscourts.gov]:
In short, your post is bad and you should feel bad.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:2, Insightful)
The crime rate usually goes down in areas where the police are corrupt or where the mafia is in control.
The rate of reported crimes probably goes down while the actual crime rate increases significantly.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think most of us citizens in the US do...as long as you come here legally.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem is that prison doesn't work like that. Prison only deters people that think they're going to be caught. It does deter some people, but they're generally the ones that would've been deterred with a fine or public embarrassment anyways. The people that do wind up in prison tend to need rehabilitation badly.
As far as the sheriff goes, the man is deeply, deeply in need of some rehabilitation himself, as he seems to have found a way of co-opting the legal system to let him engage in the sadism he so badly wants to commit.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:4, Insightful)
What is racist about trying to keep people from coming and staying in the country illegally?
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:5, Insightful)
like somebody on the newspaper site pointed out, another court was still in process about the contents of the computers seized and these police just went and took them. This computer room also hosts several other systems intermixed, that the police don't have jurisdiction, nor the county's authority, to access. The agreement was reached only 3 years ago, so the specific head of the police department agreed to those terms.. not somebody else.
Best of all though he was seeking emails of other county officials in other departments as evidence.... and he just walked in and took it, from a third party, without warrant.... whatever evidence is in those emails is now strictly off limits for his investigations as he committed contempt of court by violating an ongoing court case and by hijacking the admins by force. Whoever had any incriminations will get to walk from here on!!!! Man needs impeached for sheer legal incompetence.
Re:Summary doesn't make it clear... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm a Criminologist and I find your suggestion there to be very troubling. The US already locks up a startling number of individuals in solitary confinement. In fact, there are entire prisons dedicated to locking up the "worst of the worst", called "Supermaxes", "Maxi-Maxes", and "Administrative Maximum".
Unfortunately, the kind of 24/7 isolation that these individuals endure, often without anything in their cell besides their sheets and their clothes for entertainment (you try that for a day!), is psychological torture. It is no wonder that many of those "Supermax" inmates develop psychological or have their psychological problems exacerbated. Some literally lose their ability to be around other people, and many go insane. Others react by using the only weapon they have left against the guards: they fling their feces at the guards. There's a fantastic book by Lorna Rhodes called Total Confinement on the matter. I suggest you read that book before advocating locking any other human being into a tiny box with no stimulus for weeks, months, or years.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
It's a simple-stupid, logical argument.
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:On behalf of arizona... (Score:3, Insightful)
I gather a lot of American Indians were asking themselves the same question after 1492.