Freedom of speech? Not for our police officers

[Harpy Eagle]

No because only government is restricted by our rights. Private industry is not. Government whether an employer or not has more to worry about than the private sector. They operate under a different set of rules.

And there is nothing in that set of rules that does not allow for citizens to freely give up some of their rights for a time in exchange for a paycheck.

I have never seen any threads from you complaining about the limitations on what a member of the military can and cannot say.

 

[Mac1958]

Inch by inch, piece by piece, the PC zealots have been incredibly successful in controlling not only speech, but in intimidating employers from coast to coast.

Whether it's a police department or a department store, they now feel obligated to maintain a Zero Tolerance policy on any words that may offend the crazies.

If they don't, they may become the next target of the PC zealots. Better to fire or silence the offender than suffer the wrath of the illiberal leftist authoritarians.

As it turns out, Big Brother wasn't the government. It's our fellow American citizens merely acting as Big Brother, because they know they can get away with it.
.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, I feel that all citizens should be held to the same standard, and that is having constitutional protections and rights. The Constitution doesn't protect you everywhere, just from government. In this case, the officer was working for the government, and the government fired him for exercising his right to free speech. Unless somebody can prove he did it from a city computer, on city time, as a spokesman for the department, he has the same rights as you and I do.

Yes, he has the same rights as you and I do.

And if we take a job with the government and do what he did, we will be fired as well.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How is having an opinion interfering with your work?

The instances you gave are in the private sector. Your employer does not have to provide you constitutional rights, only the government does. An employer can make any policies they desire provided they're legal.

What would you say if I made the same comment and the government fined me for doing so? Would that be okay in your book, and if not, why not?

When you agree to work for the government (at any level) they become your employer and have every right and power as any other employer. When you accept the job you are voluntarily agreeing to their rules.

That is very different than the government fining a private citizen that does not work for them.

When I was a Marine they could have put in the the brig for the act of committing adultery, but they cannot do that to a random private citizen.

That's because you don't have a constitutional right to commit adultery.

There is no difference between the government fining me for my opinion and firing this guy for having his. They are both penalties by the government for you exercising your free speech rights.

There is a very big difference. In one case the person involved has agreed to abide by a set of rules in exchange for a paycheck, in the other case no such agreement was made.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

Neither you or I know that. We don't know what his contract said. A police officer is a city job. Do you mean to tell me that if a building department guy made the same comment on Facebook, he should also be fired simply because he works for the city?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, I feel that all citizens should be held to the same standard, and that is having constitutional protections and rights. The Constitution doesn't protect you everywhere, just from government. In this case, the officer was working for the government, and the government fired him for exercising his right to free speech. Unless somebody can prove he did it from a city computer, on city time, as a spokesman for the department, he has the same rights as you and I do.

Yes, he has the same rights as you and I do.

And if we take a job with the government and do what he did, we will be fired as well.

Then obviously he doesn't have the same rights as you and I do. That's the point. Government can't penalize me for exercising free speech and they can for exercising his. See the difference? One is penalized and the other is not for both doing the same thing.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No, I feel that all citizens should be held to the same standard, and that is having constitutional protections and rights. The Constitution doesn't protect you everywhere, just from government. In this case, the officer was working for the government, and the government fired him for exercising his right to free speech. Unless somebody can prove he did it from a city computer, on city time, as a spokesman for the department, he has the same rights as you and I do.

Yes, he has the same rights as you and I do.

And if we take a job with the government and do what he did, we will be fired as well.

Then obviously he doesn't have the same rights as you and I do. That's the point. Government can't penalize me for exercising free speech and they can for exercising his. See the difference? One is penalized and the other is not for both doing the same thing.

Yes, he does. We all have the same right to be fired from a government job if we did what he did.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, I feel that all citizens should be held to the same standard, and that is having constitutional protections and rights. The Constitution doesn't protect you everywhere, just from government. In this case, the officer was working for the government, and the government fired him for exercising his right to free speech. Unless somebody can prove he did it from a city computer, on city time, as a spokesman for the department, he has the same rights as you and I do.

Yes, he has the same rights as you and I do.

And if we take a job with the government and do what he did, we will be fired as well.

Then obviously he doesn't have the same rights as you and I do. That's the point. Government can't penalize me for exercising free speech and they can for exercising his. See the difference? One is penalized and the other is not for both doing the same thing.

Yes, he does. We all have the same right to be fired from a government job if we did what he did.

Exercising free speech? After all, that's the only thing he did; practice his constitutional rights. So what you're saying is that he (as an off duty police officer) has no constitutional rights.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Exercising free speech? After all, that's the only thing he did; practice his constitutional rights. So what you're saying is that he (as an off duty police officer) has no constitutional rights.

Yes, he has constitutional rights, but he does not have the right to work for the government. He can still exercise his free speech all he wants, he just cannot receive a paycheck from the government any more. There is no constitutional right to a paycheck.

Why do you think he has a constitutional right to have a government job?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Exercising free speech? After all, that's the only thing he did; practice his constitutional rights. So what you're saying is that he (as an off duty police officer) has no constitutional rights.

Yes, he has constitutional rights, but he does not have the right to work for the government. He can still exercise his free speech all he wants, he just cannot receive a paycheck from the government any more. There is no constitutional right to a paycheck.

Why do you think he has a constitutional right to have a government job?

I don't know. Why do you think he shouldn't have constitutional rights just to work for the government? Where in our Constitution does it say that?

 

[JoeB131]

Employers can get access to your wall. They can read what you write about. That aside, how did he get excluded from constitutional protection?

He didn't. He can still say whatever he wants. As you like to say, there's no "right" to a job. It's totally at the discretion of the employer who they keep.

Not seeing a problem here.. by your standards.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

I don't know. Why do you think he shouldn't have constitutional rights just to work for the government? Where in our Constitution does it say that?

You can have constitutional rights and work for the government, you just voluntarily agree to a few of them being curtailed a bit.

I have never seen you whine about the Hatch Act

Every member of the military does this, why do you not whine about them?

Why do you not whine about them giving up their 4th Amendment right when they have their background dug into by the government?

 

[MaryL]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

You are right about the anti-cop sentiment, especially in the younger generation.

This is an area that my son (16) and I disagree with and argue about a fair amount. Despite a couple of relatives that are cops, he says they are the exception and that most cops are rotten.

 

[MaryL]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

You are right about the anti-cop sentiment, especially in the younger generation.

This is an area that my son (16) and I disagree with and argue about a fair amount. Despite a couple of relatives that are cops, he says they are the exception and that most cops are rotten.

Ask your son, why are cops so bad? We have a contract with the police. And they have to follow that. So what are we supposed to do, abolish police and then naively trust people will respect each other all of a sudden? because that isn't how human nature works...you know it, I know it and your kids know it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I don't know. Why do you think he shouldn't have constitutional rights just to work for the government? Where in our Constitution does it say that?

You can have constitutional rights and work for the government, you just voluntarily agree to a few of them being curtailed a bit.

I have never seen you whine about the Hatch Act

Every member of the military does this, why do you not whine about them?

Why do you not whine about them giving up their 4th Amendment right when they have their background dug into by the government?

You do that voluntarily so you don't give up anything. It's the same because I have a CDL. It's the same when I renew my CCW permit. It's the same when I have to go to our annual TSA class for my job. They are not digging up anything you didn't offer.

I don't have to tell you there is no clock to punch in the military. There is a clock to punch when you're a police officer or just about any line of work. When on duty, you perform according to their regulations. Off duty, you are an average citizen entitled to all constitutional protections.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

You are right about the anti-cop sentiment, especially in the younger generation.

This is an area that my son (16) and I disagree with and argue about a fair amount. Despite a couple of relatives that are cops, he says they are the exception and that most cops are rotten.

I wouldn't worry about it. His mind will change in the upcoming years. I was the same way as a teen. I hated the cops, hated the military and war, had long hair, smoked pot, wore bellbottom jeans, and played lead guitar in rock n roll bands.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You do that voluntarily so you don't give up anything. .

which is the same thing they do when they agree to abide by the personal conduct rules which apply to off duty hours as well.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

You are right about the anti-cop sentiment, especially in the younger generation.

This is an area that my son (16) and I disagree with and argue about a fair amount. Despite a couple of relatives that are cops, he says they are the exception and that most cops are rotten.

Ask your son, why are cops so bad? We have a contract with the police. And they have to follow that. So what are we supposed to do, abolish police and then naively trust people will respect each other all of a sudden? because that isn't how human nature works...you know it, I know it and your kids know it.

He has bought into the hype they are all racist and just on a power trip. We have a great relationship, far closer to him than I was my father, but there is still only so much influence you have over a child at 16, just shy of 17.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There is this anti cop sentiment that has become popular now. This current generation is overly critical of police to the point of being self destructive. And they don't apply this same level of criticism to anything else as far as I can tell.

You are right about the anti-cop sentiment, especially in the younger generation.

This is an area that my son (16) and I disagree with and argue about a fair amount. Despite a couple of relatives that are cops, he says they are the exception and that most cops are rotten.

I wouldn't worry about it. His mind will change in the upcoming years. I was the same way as a teen. I hated the cops, hated the military and war, had long hair, smoked pot, wore bellbottom jeans, and played lead guitar in rock n roll bands.

I agree, he will.

 

[SavannahMann]

No, as most employers, not just police departments, have policies that can allow for termination for any statements that bring discredit or dishonor, or even embarrassment to the company. A few months ago, a Security Guard was fired for failing to assist a Police Officer who was struggling with a suspect. The problem there is that the Security Guard isn’t required to arrest, or assist in an arrest of anyone. By law, they are trained and expected to Observe and Report.

Yet, this is acceptable, teaching her a lesson to assist and respect Police. Employees who make derrogatory comments about police are regularly fired. People who refuse to allow police to dine in a resturant are fired, and the company rushes out to make a statement disavowing the comment and announcing proudly that the person was fired.

They brought discredit, disgrace to their companies, and paid the price. People on line who say that cops should die are investigated for making threats against the police. They are held accountable for their comments, and it is considered a Law Enforcement failure that the shooter in Florida was not stopped despite threats he made and the fact that Law Enforcement knew about them.

But when a cop is held to the same standard, months later, when it would have taken at most hours for anyone else to feel the wrath, that is a total violation of the First Amendment. Cops you see, are supposed to be above the law because they are cops.

Pfui. I’m glad this idiot was fired. What I wonder is how he managed to become a cop in the first place. How many times did he allow his idiotic personal views to interfere with his work? How many times did he stretch the truth to take care of someone who deserved it in his opinion?

How is having an opinion interfering with your work?

The instances you gave are in the private sector. Your employer does not have to provide you constitutional rights, only the government does. An employer can make any policies they desire provided they're legal.

What would you say if I made the same comment and the government fined me for doing so? Would that be okay in your book, and if not, why not?

He wasn’t fined, he was fired. As is common practice all over. You don’t seem to have a problem with private citizens being penalized for exercising their first amendment rights, but a Government employee should be exempt. Why? What about a Government Employee gives them greater rights than the average citizen.

Can You Be Fired for Hate Speech? Doesn’t the First Amendment Protect Speech?

People are not guaranteed employment. Thankfully we have not reached that level of Socialist Utopia. They may have certain protections because of Union Contracts, or legal authority, but those protections have limits as well. Obviously the Department felt that his statements, and probably the interview he went through demonstrated that he could not be trusted to carry out his duties. Rather than celebrating this rare instance of the Department holding someone accountable for their actions, you decry and denounce it. No surprise. I would argue that as Police are given greater authority under law, they must be held to a higher, not lower, standard. You obviously think they should be held to a lower standard than the citizens they are empowered over.

No, I feel that all citizens should be held to the same standard, and that is having constitutional protections and rights. The Constitution doesn't protect you everywhere, just from government. In this case, the officer was working for the government, and the government fired him for exercising his right to free speech. Unless somebody can prove he did it from a city computer, on city time, as a spokesman for the department, he has the same rights as you and I do.

Bah. Preposterous. Being terminated from your Government job, just like any other employee, for something you said, is not a violation of the First Amendment.

Ohio Police are always “On Duty” and have a responsibility to act as Police whenever they see any crime. That is the position of the Fraternal Order of Police by the way.

Ohio FOP Backs a Bill to Allow Off-Duty Officers to Carry Guns in Gun-Free Zones

That was their statement when they were pushing for Off Duty Cops to be allowed to carry concealed in a gun free zone. Cops are always on duty. Yet, on duty and off duty seem to matter regarding what they say. At least according to you. This wasn’t Government punishment. It wasn’t a Government fine, nor a Government sentence for violation of the First Amendment. It was an employer who terminated a substandard employee.