Saturday, October 18, 2014

Harrison endorsed by Daily Herald for Sheriff

Independent candidate for McHenry County Sheriff has been endorsed by the Daily Herald. You can read the full article here.

The Daily Herald editorial board summed up its endorsement in the final paragraph:

"But the position of sheriff is more than just that of a top cop. A sheriff sets policy, prepares and executes multimillion-dollar budgets, deals with complicated labor issues and more. For those duties, we believe Harrison, with his more well-rounded resume, business experience and legal background, holds an edge. We endorse Harrison."


Big Daddy said...

Lawyers are pretty much credited with hastening the decline of American society. Harrison is a lawyer. Enough said. Elect a law enforcement professional for Sheriff of McHenry County. Elect Bill Prim. The citizens of McHenry County deserve no less!

Gus said...

Big Daddy, your first sentence doesn't make any sense. Can you cite any statistics to back up your statement? Isn't it your opinion, rather than fact? Why not state it as such?

I frequently said about me that I didn't have a "cop mentality", but I understood it. My opinion is that Bill Prim has a "cop mentality".

I wonder if he is a citizen first and a cop, second. In other words, will he direct deputies to respect citizens' rights while they are enforcing the law?

That alone will be a huge shift from the reign of Nygren/Zinke.

Ex., MCSD deputies recently barged into (illegally entered) a man's home while he was showering. How quickly that fell over the newspaper's radar. What do Harrison and Prim have to say about that?

Big Daddy said...

Gus, what did Shakespeare say about lawyers? Enough said.

Big Daddy said...

Please define "cop mentality".

Gus said...

My definition of "cop mentality" is:
Cops are better than the people they protect. Laws are for the people but not for the cops. Cops can break many laws with impunity. Cops don't rat out other cops. Cops use their badges to gain favors - meals, beverages; warnings, instead of tickets. Verbal warning, instead of written warnings. Or no warnings at all. Cops can lie on the stand and get away with it. Cops can falsify reports and get away with it. An exaggerated air of importance. On-duty cops can break traffic laws without penalty. Supervisors might expect, require cops to disobey traffic laws, such as "hurrying along" (speeding; busting red lights) to a call but not using emergency equipment.

I've only known one Chief of Police who ordered his officers to obey traffic laws and to use emergency equipment only under the direst circumstances. He was Pierce Brooks (), 2nd chief of the Lakewood (Colo.) PD. Lakewood officers wore blue blazers and almost never used sirens and lights enroute to calls.

Big Daddy said...

I've never or seen things like this. Oh the occasional free cup of coffee but only with the understanding that it would get you nothing special in return. OK, a friend of mine owned a restaurant and would refyse to charge me, does that count? I left a huge tip for the wait staff though.And I have violated traffic laws in order to decrease my response time when responding to a citizens call for help. I don't know any cop that breaks/ broke laws with impunity. The only ones I heard about who broke laws were arrested. Cops never rat out other cops? I dunno Gus, where I work a substantial amount of the beefs taken are from coppers beefing about other coppers.

A Chief of Police actually ordered his officers to wear blazers and only use their EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT under the most dire if circumstances? Sounds like a real goof ball to me. One that I certainly would not work for. Imagine not using your EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT when responding to a hot call. I guess plowing into someone is a better idea but what do I know.

I dunno Gus, this is all new to me. I susoect someone us pulling your leg. Sounds like a lot of nonsense to me. Where did you hear about thus?

Gus said...

Chief Brooks carefully defined "hot" calls, with the thought in mind to reduce danger to citizens.

Right in Woodstock in front of Wendy's, a Woodstock cop busted a red light by Wendy's at 40MPH (probably faster), and the investigating deputy did not ticket him.
It's often "business-as-usual" to ticket the civilian driver, when a deputy is involved in a crash.
Or ticket no one, if it's the deputy's fault. When a MCSD deputy pulled a U-turn off a highway shoulder and hit the right side of a passing car, he was not ticketed. The civilian was listed as Unit 1 (the at-fault driver), but not ticketed, and the County refused to pay for the damage to her vehicle.
As you know, state law allows a cop to speed while using emergency equipment, but NOT when he is not. But many do. And supervisors allow them to. Even State Police speed, when just patrolling or heading for lunch.

Big Daddy said...

Gus, while I don't know the particulars on these cases you mention, all I can say is this. During my career, I have stopped probably thousands of traffic violaters. Very few were given tickets. So if I see a guys, say a little late on a red light and he happens to be a copper, should I write him even though I didn't write you for the same thing? Are you saying I should write him simply because he's a cop? Or should I just write everyone?

Gus said...

No, Big Daddy, I do not believe that cops should be discriminated against. If you would let a civilian driver go, let the cop go.

In my 8 years as a reserve deputy in Colorado, I made a lot of stops and wrote only a few tickets. I decided whether to ticket, before I got off the motorcycle or out of the squad. There were a few memorable times when I changed my mind and wrote a ticket, like the Pantera driver who had the license plate in the back window, when he made a "St. Louis stop" at a stop sign (rolled through it).

Turned out he owned five Panteras and had only one license plate. He was talking so fast that I knew something was wrong.

Discretion is okay, as long as it is applied evenly.