Bill Would Ban Police From Preserving Order At Polling Locations | MassCops

Bill Would Ban Police From Preserving Order At Polling Locations

Discussion in 'Law Enforcement Articles' started by RodneyFarva, Sep 28, 2020.

  1. RodneyFarva

    RodneyFarva Get off my lawn!

    Ok, two things:
    1, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
    2, And the second a shit load of well armed, right leaning voters, good samaritans, members of a private security group, neighborhood watch, retired : military, police, fire et al. show up they will change their tune very quickly.

    Boston, MA – Massachusetts state lawmakers are considering a bill that would ban county and state law enforcement officers from maintaining order at polling locations.

    State Rep. Antonio Cabral (D-New Bedford) and nine other co-sponsors filed HD5270 on Sept. 18.

    Under the proposed legislation, “no county or state law enforcement officers, including but not limited to sheriffs, special sheriffs, and deputy sheriffs…officers employed thereby, and persons acting on their behalf, shall be permitted on the premises of a polling place or within 300 feet of a polling place to preserve order or protect election officers and supervisors…or to aid in enforcing he laws relating to elections.”
    The only exception to the ban would be in cases where the “board or officer in charge” of the city’s police force and the secretary of public safety and security both issue written permission allowing state or county law enforcement officers to be present.

    The legislation was filed after President Donald Trump confirmed that he would be dispatching law enforcement officers and federal attorneys to polling locations in order to monitor elections for potential voter fraud, according to a press release issued by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey on Sept. 17.

    “We’re going to have everything,” the President said in a recent interview. “We’re going to have sheriffs and law enforcement and we’re going to have, hopefully, U.S. attorneys, and…attorney generals…”

    Healey labeled President Trump’s plan to send law enforcement officers to polling places as a “threat.”
    “We won’t sit idle in the face of President Trump’s dangerous threats to undermine our electoral process and suppress votes,” Healey wrote. “We are issuing this advisory to ensure citizens of Massachusetts know they are entitled to free and fair elections and to put President Trump on notice that any attempt to interfere with our democracy will not be tolerated.”

    She said she wanted to “make clear that intimidating or interfering with voters is illegal,” and that voters have a “right to vote safely and free from intimidation, harassment, and coercion” that is protected by both federal and state law.

    Massachusetts Voter Table Director Beth Huang said that President Trump’s “threats to increase the presence of law enforcement at polling locations will lead to the intimidation of voters of color and immigrants, who have been targeted by the administration’s racist and xenophobic policies and rhetoric in the past four years,” according to the press release.

    “We are working with community organizations across the Commonwealth to ensure that all voters know and exercise their right to vote safely this fall,” Huang added.
    MassVOTE Executive Director Cheryl Clyburn Crawford alleged that increasing law enforcement presence at polling location qualified as an attempt to “suppress and intimidate voters.”

    “The President’s threat to send military or law enforcement personnel to our polling places is, ironically, an attempt to scare individuals out of voting,” Crawford claimed. “It should not stand and will not. We applaud the Attorney General for standing so strongly on this issue, and we will support her every step of the way.”

    Cabral filed the proposed legislation just one day after Healey issued her “Advisory on Poll Monitoring and Voter Intimidation.”
  2. HistoryHound

    HistoryHound Supporting Member

    One of the dumbest things I've seen in a while (and that's saying a lot), but I can't say I'm surprised. So glad we moved.
  3. patrol22

    patrol22 MassCops Member

    Since when so Sheriffs or Troopers do this anyways?
    EUPD377 likes this.
  4. RodneyFarva

    RodneyFarva Get off my lawn!

    Since I don't think ever. The closest I can remember are several cities and town would appoint special constables to keep order and for lack of a better term "enforce" signage rules and pedestrian traffic.
  5. patrol22

    patrol22 MassCops Member

    Ahh so yet another unenforceable and pointless law. I was going to say as far as I remember it’s only local cops doing the details at the polls
    mpd61 likes this.
  6. USAF286

    USAF286 MassCops Member

    I didn’t realize police were the problems at polls...I always thought it was the people holding signs refusing to stay the proper distance from the voting precinct and harassing motorists. I’m sure the 97 year old lady poll warden or whatever they’re called will be able to handle it.
  7. CCCSD

    CCCSD MassCops Member

    So the black panthers will be in charge again? Great. Vote Black or beaten. Way to stay classy, MA.
    Guess you forgot your place in the formation of the US, huh?
    Fucking assholes.
    Tuna, EUPD377 and PG1911 like this.
  8. mpd61

    mpd61 Retired Fed, Active Special

    Look at the bright side, it's another foolish, knee-jerk reaction to Trump saying something. Trump doesn't have ANYTHING to do with State/County L.E. anyway. Plus the wording leaves out SSPO's, so they may yet be able to get some real glory......
    RodneyFarva and Goose like this.
  9. CCCSD

    CCCSD MassCops Member

    Thanks for pointing out some sense: SSPOs are a treasure to be used in key positions.
    mpd61 likes this.
  10. AB7

    AB7 MassCops Member

    You guys are hilarious!
    This makes no mention of local/municipal police. As someone else said, that’s usually who I’ve seen staffing these venues.

    Never seen a trooper or deputy sheriff, or federal agent for that matter, guarding a polling place.

    Who is to say that they can’t be in the area outside the polling location? There’s definitely a loophole here. 300 feet? Haha. That’s a joke.
    Hush likes this.

Share This Page