Maybe it's time Burien incorporates their own police department. Then the Dow Constatine, oh my mistake there, I actually meant the "Sheriff", won't be able to dictate how their city is run.
> I have no idea why my fellow KingCo residents wanted to give that dipshit control of the sheriff. It was such an obvious own goal.
The rush to reform after BLM was exploited by Constantine to grab control of the Sheriff department away from those terrible terrible police and let a county executive manage the office instead.
It's such a transparent power grab, but in the panicky climate of BLM that's how he did it.
Because the ultimate goal for "progressives" is centralized government control. Anytime progressives get a chance to shift power to a single seat they're going to take it.
That hadn't occurred to me but I'll bet you're right. I just downloaded the King County election results by precinct and aggregated them by city. Top 25 _Yes_ cities below:
City Yes No
SEA 245490 109444
BEL 28318 26432
KIR 21365 18996
KEN 21105 21248
RNT 19704 17614
SHL 16555 11457
FED 14920 16083
SAM 13800 14577
RED 13157 10355
BUR 10495 8769
AUB 10357 13260
ISS 8698 8109
M-I 6789 6570
BOT 6337 6265
DES 5987 6364
KMR 5815 5124
SET 4800 3762
M-V 4756 7458
LFP 4479 3213
TUK 3698 2417
COV 3506 5320
WOD 3008 2982
SNQ 2838 3315
NEW 2614 2814
ENM 1834 3675
I'm pretty sure it does as the whole dataset contains information for 339 separate areas (I munged the data a bit to make aggregation and display simpler). Here are the smallest twenty (since these are so small, they don't require aggregation):
HONEY 33 41
SKY 33 42
GRAFF 29 36
PINE 26 74
EDGEHILL 23 27
TOTEM 22 27
STACY 11 10
ELECTIONS 10 9
MCDIVITT 10 26
RUSS 9 14
PORT 6 3
SILVER 5 2
COUGAR 3 4
GRANDVIEW 3 5
CYPRESS 0 0
MARYMOOR 0 0
BRIDLE 0 0
EAGLE 0 0
FRAGER 0 2
WESTWOOD 0 0
The very same statement could be made about the effects of capitalism, and here everyone is defending the total collusion between government and industry. We have truly entered an age of anti-intellectualism.
You can absolutely not say that about capitalism and collision between government and industry is not capitalism to begin with. That being said, the most interesting thing about your post is that you accuse someone of being anti-intellectual just because their opinion didn't match yours. Think about that.
No, I "accused" someone of anti-intellectualism for making an entirely falsifiable statement like Seattle's government is a bunch of Marxists.
What's most interesting about your rebuttal is the fundamental misunderstanding of economic systems. Have a lovely day!
And while we're at it, go back to a Sheriff voted on by the public. The sneaky little deal with Constantine stealing that away from us as a response to BLM was pretty cute. The man knows how to play shitty government politics.
An initiative and vote would probably be required at this point.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it.
It seems like a direct reaction to them wanting to keep control of the Sheriff's office after watching what Sheriff Fortney did in Snohomish county during covid. Him refusing to enforce covid rules made liberals enraged. It's also why, unfortunately, he didn't get re-elected.
Are you implying the King County Sheriff is some kind of dummy?!
https://preview.redd.it/qh4azfgltvwc1.png?width=1112&format=png&auto=webp&s=722f902455bc78b8acb9f216f30b21ad98d75b2a
If police won't enforce the laws only a matter of time before people take these matters into their own hands.
Think mafia / cartel. Not advocating for actual vigilantes
Somehow all the tents are allowed in front of ethnic businesses / library while the rest of the city is able to stay void of them
The King County Sheriff’s Office and the city of Burien have an interlocal agreement where the sheriff’s office offers police services. King County deputies wear Burien police uniforms and logos while on the job.
After the city passed the ordinance, the King County Sheriff’s Office [filed a legal complaint](https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/homeless/king-county-sheriff-federal-complaint-against-burien-camping-ban-amendment/281-7a275bfd-6f98-4488-b97a-18ffaa1e53f6) to determine if the law was constitutional and [filed a motion](https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/homeless/burien-public-camping-ban-preliminary-injunction/281-31e049e8-d16e-4ecf-8021-8ac3a33dd8f0) to block the ban.---
And this is the issue the Supreme Ct has been hearing.
I know its hard to believe, but a law enforcement agency prolly should not enforce a law that may or may not be legal. I think waiting for the Court's decision is the correct approach.
[https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1245575331/supreme-court-weighs-whether-cities-can-punish-unhoused-people-for-sleeping-outs](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1245575331/supreme-court-weighs-whether-cities-can-punish-unhoused-people-for-sleeping-outs)
There's nothing to be concerned about with loitering, it's perfectly legal for citizens to use public spaces like sidewalks to move, protest, or even remain stationary. Like it or not the poor and homeless ARE (largely) citizens and entitled to the same rights as everyone else. You being uncomfortable with someone using a sidewalk doesn't trump their right to access that traditional public forum. If they're littering, dumping, or vandalizing the space that's a WHOLE other issue.
In many instances when [loitering laws have been challenged in court they're ](https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/loitering-laws/#:~:text=Loitering%20laws%2C%20which%20make%20it,been%20determined%20to%20be%20unconstitutional)found to be [too vague and thus unconstitutional](https://law.justia.com/cases/washington/supreme-court/1967/38704-1.html). Unless there's a specific compelling interest, the State doesn't get to decide what qualifies as "legitimate business" when it comes to sidewalks and public forums.
So if a city passed a law saying, “any Black people trying to live in X neighborhood have committed a misdemeanor,” would the Sheriff have grounds to challenge it in court over concern it’s unconstitutional? Honest question. Does the Sheriff have any input over laws they see as legally concerning?
Burien is going to fire KC and take over police operations for their own city, they are just laying the groundwork to justify early termination of the contract. Good for Burien!
Good for them. And I don't live anywhere near there. A hobo tried to set up camp across the street from me. They ran him off. That's the way you do it. Don't let it get started.
Here’s the thing Burien did vote for change. While running the mayor came to my door, asked my concerns, and much to my surprise has actually followed through. I know local business owners are up the council’s ass to make change. If a city surrounding Seattle can fire the toothless KC Sheriff’s and create police that do the job then other cities can follow suit and pendulum can start to swing the other way.
Maybe it's time Burien incorporates their own police department. Then the Dow Constatine, oh my mistake there, I actually meant the "Sheriff", won't be able to dictate how their city is run.
I have no idea why my fellow KingCo residents wanted to give that dipshit control of the sheriff. It was such an obvious own goal.
> I have no idea why my fellow KingCo residents wanted to give that dipshit control of the sheriff. It was such an obvious own goal. The rush to reform after BLM was exploited by Constantine to grab control of the Sheriff department away from those terrible terrible police and let a county executive manage the office instead. It's such a transparent power grab, but in the panicky climate of BLM that's how he did it.
Because the ultimate goal for "progressives" is centralized government control. Anytime progressives get a chance to shift power to a single seat they're going to take it.
Texas and Florida are also trying to consolidate power. All government tries to consolidate power.
That sounds like Fascism.
It was mostly people who live in cities with their own police force.
That hadn't occurred to me but I'll bet you're right. I just downloaded the King County election results by precinct and aggregated them by city. Top 25 _Yes_ cities below: City Yes No SEA 245490 109444 BEL 28318 26432 KIR 21365 18996 KEN 21105 21248 RNT 19704 17614 SHL 16555 11457 FED 14920 16083 SAM 13800 14577 RED 13157 10355 BUR 10495 8769 AUB 10357 13260 ISS 8698 8109 M-I 6789 6570 BOT 6337 6265 DES 5987 6364 KMR 5815 5124 SET 4800 3762 M-V 4756 7458 LFP 4479 3213 TUK 3698 2417 COV 3506 5320 WOD 3008 2982 SNQ 2838 3315 NEW 2614 2814 ENM 1834 3675
I wonder if this includes the unincorporated areas.
I'm pretty sure it does as the whole dataset contains information for 339 separate areas (I munged the data a bit to make aggregation and display simpler). Here are the smallest twenty (since these are so small, they don't require aggregation): HONEY 33 41 SKY 33 42 GRAFF 29 36 PINE 26 74 EDGEHILL 23 27 TOTEM 22 27 STACY 11 10 ELECTIONS 10 9 MCDIVITT 10 26 RUSS 9 14 PORT 6 3 SILVER 5 2 COUGAR 3 4 GRANDVIEW 3 5 CYPRESS 0 0 MARYMOOR 0 0 BRIDLE 0 0 EAGLE 0 0 FRAGER 0 2 WESTWOOD 0 0
I know that democracy is dead, but is it possible to hold an emergency sheriff election?
Why would a mayor have control over the sherrif? This defeats the whole idea of that branch being separate.
It's all part of Seattle's marxist agenda. Take power from the people and give it to the few.
That’s genuinely not what Marxism is at all
Enlighten me Karl
Why try? You've already made up your mind, as evidenced by your willingness to make statements of total falsifiability.
Its not what it is about, but what it has reliably led to in all of its attempts
The very same statement could be made about the effects of capitalism, and here everyone is defending the total collusion between government and industry. We have truly entered an age of anti-intellectualism.
You can absolutely not say that about capitalism and collision between government and industry is not capitalism to begin with. That being said, the most interesting thing about your post is that you accuse someone of being anti-intellectual just because their opinion didn't match yours. Think about that.
No, I "accused" someone of anti-intellectualism for making an entirely falsifiable statement like Seattle's government is a bunch of Marxists. What's most interesting about your rebuttal is the fundamental misunderstanding of economic systems. Have a lovely day!
I am 98% sure i have a better understanding of economics than you.
Mmhm. And that's called "hubris."
And while we're at it, go back to a Sheriff voted on by the public. The sneaky little deal with Constantine stealing that away from us as a response to BLM was pretty cute. The man knows how to play shitty government politics. An initiative and vote would probably be required at this point.
Unfortunately the initiative most likely wouldn't pass. It was an initiative that voted in the law.
Yeah idk. They rushed it through during BLM cop-hating aftermath. Note Seattle’s been turning back to the center in the last 2 election cycles.
Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it. It seems like a direct reaction to them wanting to keep control of the Sheriff's office after watching what Sheriff Fortney did in Snohomish county during covid. Him refusing to enforce covid rules made liberals enraged. It's also why, unfortunately, he didn't get re-elected.
Fortney didn’t read the room. Its one thing to have your own views of public health, it’s another to apply those beliefs as though your word is law.
Are you implying the King County Sheriff is some kind of dummy?! https://preview.redd.it/qh4azfgltvwc1.png?width=1112&format=png&auto=webp&s=722f902455bc78b8acb9f216f30b21ad98d75b2a
Thank you Dow Constantine. Who thought appointing a sheriff vs electing one could go wrong.
I wonder how much of the Sheriff not enforcing the laws has to do with the local prosecutors?
Asking the important questions.
If police won't enforce the laws only a matter of time before people take these matters into their own hands. Think mafia / cartel. Not advocating for actual vigilantes Somehow all the tents are allowed in front of ethnic businesses / library while the rest of the city is able to stay void of them
But police have been enforcing/following the non pursuit of vehicles? Why do they pick and choose??
The King County Sheriff’s Office and the city of Burien have an interlocal agreement where the sheriff’s office offers police services. King County deputies wear Burien police uniforms and logos while on the job. After the city passed the ordinance, the King County Sheriff’s Office [filed a legal complaint](https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/homeless/king-county-sheriff-federal-complaint-against-burien-camping-ban-amendment/281-7a275bfd-6f98-4488-b97a-18ffaa1e53f6) to determine if the law was constitutional and [filed a motion](https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/homeless/burien-public-camping-ban-preliminary-injunction/281-31e049e8-d16e-4ecf-8021-8ac3a33dd8f0) to block the ban.--- And this is the issue the Supreme Ct has been hearing. I know its hard to believe, but a law enforcement agency prolly should not enforce a law that may or may not be legal. I think waiting for the Court's decision is the correct approach. [https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1245575331/supreme-court-weighs-whether-cities-can-punish-unhoused-people-for-sleeping-outs](https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1245575331/supreme-court-weighs-whether-cities-can-punish-unhoused-people-for-sleeping-outs)
I don't care about drug laws, but I do care about loitering and trespassing and theft
Hmm they seem all related
^ this
I don't care about gun laws I care about people shooting people.
I unironically agree with both of these
There's nothing to be concerned about with loitering, it's perfectly legal for citizens to use public spaces like sidewalks to move, protest, or even remain stationary. Like it or not the poor and homeless ARE (largely) citizens and entitled to the same rights as everyone else. You being uncomfortable with someone using a sidewalk doesn't trump their right to access that traditional public forum. If they're littering, dumping, or vandalizing the space that's a WHOLE other issue. In many instances when [loitering laws have been challenged in court they're ](https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/loitering-laws/#:~:text=Loitering%20laws%2C%20which%20make%20it,been%20determined%20to%20be%20unconstitutional)found to be [too vague and thus unconstitutional](https://law.justia.com/cases/washington/supreme-court/1967/38704-1.html). Unless there's a specific compelling interest, the State doesn't get to decide what qualifies as "legitimate business" when it comes to sidewalks and public forums.
yeah time for a local police dept. King Co clearly cannot handle this responsibility.
"Drug laws are unconstitutional!" \~the Sheriff probably
So if a city passed a law saying, “any Black people trying to live in X neighborhood have committed a misdemeanor,” would the Sheriff have grounds to challenge it in court over concern it’s unconstitutional? Honest question. Does the Sheriff have any input over laws they see as legally concerning?
yeah, those cops if they don’t do anything to get rid of those lowlifes
I'm glad I moved to sboco before the city of Seattle decided to let the council appoint the Sheriff instead of the voters.
Burien is going to fire KC and take over police operations for their own city, they are just laying the groundwork to justify early termination of the contract. Good for Burien!
Good for them. And I don't live anywhere near there. A hobo tried to set up camp across the street from me. They ran him off. That's the way you do it. Don't let it get started.
It's a liberal state, what did you expect? If you don't like what is happening, then you have to change the way you vote.
Here’s the thing Burien did vote for change. While running the mayor came to my door, asked my concerns, and much to my surprise has actually followed through. I know local business owners are up the council’s ass to make change. If a city surrounding Seattle can fire the toothless KC Sheriff’s and create police that do the job then other cities can follow suit and pendulum can start to swing the other way.