Talk:Mark Lamb (sheriff)

"Political bias"
An IP editor recently removed a couple of sentences on Lamb's approach to his job on the basis they constitute "political bias". I haven't reverted as I think it's often best not to restore possibly contentious material in the absence of a clear consensus, but I don't find their argument compelling. The claims made are clearly supported by the source cited, though it's possible they could be revised to match the source even more closely. I'd be interested to know what others think. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2022 (UTC)


 * " Lamb enforces law selectively, taking an uncompromising approach to immigration while adopting anti-government rhetoric in relation to COVID-19 vaccination mandates and the legitimacy of the 2020 United States presidential election. He opposes all restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms. "
 * It's bias because the source itself is wrong. What law is he not enforcing? He's not selectively enforcing law, for example an "uncompromising approach to immigration", he's against illegal immigration. It's illegal, so he's actually enforcing the law. The next claim is he was against the vaccine mandates. The vaccine mandates are not a law, they're an executive mandate. And simply being against them rhetorically says nothing about his enforcing. Similarly, questioning the result of 2020's election does not "selectively enforce" law. What law is he not enforcing by saying he feels the election was, along some gradient, fraudulent? Lastly, opposing restrictions on the 2nd amendment is a matter of higher power, because I assume he thinks the Constitution trumps any supposed law against guns. 2600:8800:8800:76:0:0:0:B6 (talk) 23:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)