When did selective law enforcement become ‘constitutional’?
In response to Chris Martinson’s letter that appeared in the paper two weeks ago:
Chris, the way I read your opinion piece regarding Sheriff Wilz being a constitutionalist, you may be bucking for a seat on the non-supreme SCOTUS, with their solid originalist majority.
Your constitutional Sheriff Wilz posed for a cover photo on the August-September 2016 “Concealed Carry” magazine. While I believe in the right to carry arms, I’m personally not sure that is the “attitude” I want in my law enforcement leader to be cover boy for urban cowboy.
Sheriff Wilz openly stated two years ago that he would not enforce the governor’s mask mandate. I am assuming you were referring to this when you listed “illegal mandate.” I understand if he explained that he didn’t have enough deputies, etc., – but smiling while defying a mandate by the governor doesn’t seem right to me. That seems like politics vs. science and fact. I realize I do not know for certain but I’m thinking the sheriff does not have a degree in microbiology or public health.
It seems you fail to use rational judgment when reading our constitution. The world is a different place than in 1776 and in my humble opinion this requires the use of some judgment in interpreting what was written at the founding of our country in the context of the world we live in. Frankly, it scares me a bit that someone with this type judgment is president of the New London School Board.