My bright idea is that if I ever get pulled over, I would say I thought speed limit referred to a minimum, not maximum speed. I don't think it will work out, but I think it should.
Yep. Remember when we thought those ideas were "fringe"?
Now, one of our two candidates last year openly proclaimed that as county sheriff he would refuse to enforce laws he believed were unconstitutional. The other candidate said "As sheriff, I don't get to pick and choose the laws which we enforce. It's my job to enforce all the laws equally."
Fortunately, the "constitutional sheriff" candidate was defeated, and the one who believed he should uphold the law, not interpret it, was returned to office. But not by much.
Good to know the constiutional sherrif was defeated, cause I've heard about them but not any election results. Not by much you say? Take the win, I say. It tells me Independents made the difference. That's where elections are won in our highly polarized electorate.
I think in our case it's that our university town is an island of blue (or at least less red) in a deep red state. I was ecstatic about the results, but fear that fear-mongering will push the balance the other way at some point. Eternal vigilance, as they say...
So next time I get stopped for speeding, I’ll tell the officer that based on my interpretation I was fully complying with the posted speed limit.
My bright idea is that if I ever get pulled over, I would say I thought speed limit referred to a minimum, not maximum speed. I don't think it will work out, but I think it should.
Probably as good a chance as my approach, which plead ignorance.
You could try the sovereign citizen thing.
That only works if you're a high-profile GOPer.
Or a GOP sheriff, with the "authority" to interpret the Constitution...
Any of you old enough to remember Gordon Kahl? He had joined a group that insisted ONLY sheriffs could enforce the law.
Yep. Remember when we thought those ideas were "fringe"?
Now, one of our two candidates last year openly proclaimed that as county sheriff he would refuse to enforce laws he believed were unconstitutional. The other candidate said "As sheriff, I don't get to pick and choose the laws which we enforce. It's my job to enforce all the laws equally."
Fortunately, the "constitutional sheriff" candidate was defeated, and the one who believed he should uphold the law, not interpret it, was returned to office. But not by much.
Good to know the constiutional sherrif was defeated, cause I've heard about them but not any election results. Not by much you say? Take the win, I say. It tells me Independents made the difference. That's where elections are won in our highly polarized electorate.
I think in our case it's that our university town is an island of blue (or at least less red) in a deep red state. I was ecstatic about the results, but fear that fear-mongering will push the balance the other way at some point. Eternal vigilance, as they say...
Extra ❤❤❤❤s for this comment.