267
submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

No, not that Texas sheriff who was under scrutiny following a mass shooting, this one

Greg Capers had sought a fourth term as sheriff in San Jacinto County, which is about 60 miles (97 km) north of Houston.

But on Tuesday, Capers lost the Republican nomination for sheriff to San Jacinto County Precinct 3 Constable Sam Houston. With no Democratic candidates on the ballot Tuesday, Houston is set to be elected the new sheriff in November.

Capers drew criticism for initially providing inaccurate information about deputies’ response time to the April 2023 shooting in which Francisco Oropeza is accused of killing his neighbors after they had asked him to stop shooting his gun near their house. The attack happened near the town of Cleveland, north of Houston.

Archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20240306181509/https://apnews.com/article/texas-sheriff-greg-capers-election-d1748ed0d68d9c84f3baaa27582075f4

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] NobodyElse@sh.itjust.works 7 points 7 months ago

Not to defend this guy, or even police in general (ACAB), but the sheriff or chief of police is supposed to be more of a political position that decides where to allocate resources and how to prioritize the needs of the community. Since that involves discerning the will of the people, it makes sense that the people should decide who fills the role and get to continually reevaluate it. The alternative is that another politician just appoints someone into the role, which has most of the same downsides while also being undemocratic.

That’s just theory, of course, and not even considering how messed up the whole election process really is.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago

I'm not sure there's much difference between worrying about the mayor making his own private army and the police chief making his own private army, except for the additional name on a ballot. And on that theme, wouldn't how we deal with crime, safety, and how we interact with the residents of the city be things the leader of the city is also worried about? I'm not saying the reasoning is wrong, I just don't think it solves the problems you raised.

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 2 points 7 months ago

The alternative is that another politician just appoints someone into the role, which has most of the same downsides while also being undemocratic.

Canada uses Police Boards to vet who should hired (from within or outside the specific force).

Judges are appointed by provincial or federal governments, usually after being vetted by hiring committees.

Our Supreme Court of Canada (SCoC) bases their opinions on far more than "original intent". They also take into account our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and do not recognize businesses being equal to individuals in having those rights.

As a result we have very few instances of any judges ruling based on their political beliefs vs prior similar rulings or what the law actually states.

this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
267 points (98.9% liked)

News

23182 readers
3138 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.


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