Freedom of speech? Not for our police officers

[Ray From Cleveland]

Your use of the word racist is typical of
of most radically saturated morons.
Failure to use any kind of real thought
is what leads to this dysfunction, substituting it instead with protozoan reflex. I have no doubt that the city was motivated by fear of financial loss.... Firing the officer does not prevent anyone from claiming that the city
Threatened Farrahkahn...which of course is rediculous. But this same society will tolerate a female comedian suggesting that we behead the POTUS.

Again, imagine this.

Officer McRacist shoots a black kid on patrol. The family comes back and sues the city, and then they find out he's on Facebook saying racist shit. The question immediately becomes, "Why did you keep this guy on the street knowing he was a racist?"

Should point out, Kathy Griffin lost her job, too.

What was racist about what he said? Show me one word that can even be associated with race.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

This officer gave an opinion on FB. He was suspended for several months and then fired. His opinion had nothing to do with his job nor was he speaking in an official capacity. His First was violated because the government retaliated for him exercising his rights.

Let me ask you this, are you ok with the government "retaliating" against someone for him exercising their rights while on the clock?

Can the government punish a government employee for exercising their right to free speech while on the clock?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What a minute......substandard employee? Where did you get that from?

The officer said (about Louie) that he's surprised nobody offed him yet. What is substandard about that? Louis Farrakhan is an anti-Semite white hating bigot. His rants offend millions of people. Is it not reasonable to say that it's surprising that somebody didn't take such offense to his rhetoric that they didn't respond with violence?

I think you are seeing this the wrong way. Cities already have to pay out millions every year for shitty racist cops. So now they have a racist cop who self identifies before he shoots a kid playing with a toy or something. Awesome. Let's get rid of him now before he kills someone.

No, he said nothing racist. You guys on the left constantly call black conservatives House N's or Uncle Tom's. But dare a white guy say anything about a person, he's racist simply because he was black. So in other words, the new Commie law is nobody is allowed to speak a bad word about people who are not white.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Cops are not the enemy. What can I say? This goes deep into our psyche. What? Are we going to let the Crips or the Bloods dictate laws now? Let the criminals dictate laws? I am a proud snitch, I HATE prison culture mentality. And that is what liberal groupthink has become. The lowest common denominator , fill in the blank.

Cops aren't the enemy, but we should really demand better behavior from them, because their bad behavior can be so darned expensive.

Just look at the settlements cities have to pay for police brutality every year.

LaQuan McDonald's family got $6 MM
Tamir Rice's family got $5MM
Walter Scott got $.6.5MM

That's not an indication of how faulty our police are, it's an indication how faulty our justice system is.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This officer gave an opinion on FB. He was suspended for several months and then fired. His opinion had nothing to do with his job nor was he speaking in an official capacity. His First was violated because the government retaliated for him exercising his rights.

Let me ask you this, are you ok with the government "retaliating" against someone for him exercising their rights while on the clock?

Can the government punish a government employee for exercising their right to free speech while on the clock?

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

So, let me see if I get this straight...

you are ok with the government stripping citizens of their rights while they are on the clock, but not after work? Is that correct?

 

[Moonglow]

A police officer eventually lost his job because he said "I'm surprised that nobody offed him yet" in reference to Calypso Louie on Facebook. He never said he'd like to.....or that somebody should.......just the he was surprised nobody hasn't.

He was suspended several months ago and now our local Fox affiliate claims he was recently fired for the comment. So that begs the questions: if this officer made a similar comment about a white radical, would he still be on the job today? Does this officer have a case for a First Amendment violation lawsuit?

Akron police officer relieved of duty after Facebook post about Farrakhan

Sounds like a personal problem.

 

[Moonglow]

This officer gave an opinion on FB. He was suspended for several months and then fired. His opinion had nothing to do with his job nor was he speaking in an official capacity. His First was violated because the government retaliated for him exercising his rights.

Let me ask you this, are you ok with the government "retaliating" against someone for him exercising their rights while on the clock?

Can the government punish a government employee for exercising their right to free speech while on the clock?

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

What makes you think we have rights?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

So, let me see if I get this straight...

you are ok with the government stripping citizens of their rights while they are on the clock, but not after work? Is that correct?

That is correct. It's just like I have to take a drug test if an officer pulls me over in my truck and decides to send me in for a test. He cannot do the same if I'm driving my car and he has no reasonable suspicion that I"m driving impaired.

Every time I get pulled over, I ask the officer what I did wrong. He usually responds "Oh, nothing is wrong, but I'm going to find something wrong." He then proceeds to check out my entire truck, look inside of the trailer, demands my paperwork, and on a few occasions when they couldn't find anything, look under the hood of my vehicle.

If a cop did that to me in my car, I would have a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit.

 

[JoeB131]

I do not hate cops. A common refrain that is meant to delegitimize my arguments. I applied simple logic, and history, to the question. It is simply not possible.

Uh, guy, I get a lot of flack here for criticizing police misconduct, but I look at your stuff and even I'm saying, "Damn, notch it back a few, 'kay?"

Look at the case you started with. Three cops lied on their reports, and were acquitted of Perjury. If we were to use the 1% of cops were bad statistic, then somewhere, there were 496 good cops who just happened not to be at that scene at that time. What are the odds of that? One was a murderer, and three were Perjurers. Four felons all in the same place, at the same time, as a random occourance just when it was needed?

I put those other three cops in the category of the 99% who felt the need to cover for the one percent. Two of them were forced to retire despite being acquitted.

One of those changes, was Polygraph testing for cops. Ten minutes and they’re done for another six months. Just a few simple questions. Have you lied on any reports or lied under oath? Do you know of anyone who has done those things that you haven’t reported? Have you planted evidence or have reason to believe that evidence was planted? Have you seen any abuse of a suspect, or have you abused a suspect?

Polygraphs are voodoo science... you might as well bring in the Witchfinder General as an office.

 

[JoeB131]

What was racist about what he said? Show me one word that can even be associated with race.

That he wondered why somebody doesn't go off that uppity negro? Sounds like an incitement to violence to me.

FIRED!!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What was racist about what he said? Show me one word that can even be associated with race.

That he wondered why somebody doesn't go off that uppity negro? Sounds like an incitement to violence to me.

FIRED!!!

So that's the problem. Your mind inserts words that really aren't there and that's what you are seeing. I think that's a very serious problem Joe. You need to see somebody about that.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

So, let me see if I get this straight...

you are ok with the government stripping citizens of their rights while they are on the clock, but not after work? Is that correct?

That is correct. It's just like I have to take a drug test if an officer pulls me over in my truck and decides to send me in for a test. He cannot do the same if I'm driving my car and he has no reasonable suspicion that I"m driving impaired.

Every time I get pulled over, I ask the officer what I did wrong. He usually responds "Oh, nothing is wrong, but I'm going to find something wrong." He then proceeds to check out my entire truck, look inside of the trailer, demands my paperwork, and on a few occasions when they couldn't find anything, look under the hood of my vehicle.

If a cop did that to me in my car, I would have a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit.

Ok, so you are good with the the government stripping citizens of their rights, your only disagreement is when they are allowed to do such thing.

 

[Dragonlady]

A police officer eventually lost his job because he said "I'm surprised that nobody offed him yet" in reference to Calypso Louie on Facebook. He never said he'd like to.....or that somebody should.......just the he was surprised nobody hasn't.

He was suspended several months ago and now our local Fox affiliate claims he was recently fired for the comment. So that begs the questions: if this officer made a similar comment about a white radical, would he still be on the job today? Does this officer have a case for a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit?

Nope.

We are all held accountable for what we say on social media under our own names... It's why we all use aliases here.

Isn't a first amendment issue.

Thanks for pointing out I had the wrong amendment. I made the correction.

The people of this country are provided protection from government retaliation when it comes to speech. I don't care if you are a police officer, a lineman, a snow plow driver. We are all protected.

This officer made no threat against anti-semite Louie. He didn't say somebody else should off him. He simply said he's surprised it hasn't happened yet given the fact this anti-American is hate monger.

When coming from a law enforcement officer, it could easily be construed as giving permission for someone to off the guy, He knew the rules when he signed the contract. He should have said nothing.

I've been barred from publically saying or doing anything or expressing my opinion because of my job. We all sign confidentiality agreements, and that extends to saying stupid things someone could take the wrong way.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

A police officer eventually lost his job because he said "I'm surprised that nobody offed him yet" in reference to Calypso Louie on Facebook. He never said he'd like to.....or that somebody should.......just the he was surprised nobody hasn't.

He was suspended several months ago and now our local Fox affiliate claims he was recently fired for the comment. So that begs the questions: if this officer made a similar comment about a white radical, would he still be on the job today? Does this officer have a case for a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit?

Nope.

We are all held accountable for what we say on social media under our own names... It's why we all use aliases here.

Isn't a first amendment issue.

Thanks for pointing out I had the wrong amendment. I made the correction.

The people of this country are provided protection from government retaliation when it comes to speech. I don't care if you are a police officer, a lineman, a snow plow driver. We are all protected.

This officer made no threat against anti-semite Louie. He didn't say somebody else should off him. He simply said he's surprised it hasn't happened yet given the fact this anti-American is hate monger.

When coming from a law enforcement officer, it could easily be construed as giving permission for someone to off the guy, He knew the rules when he signed the contract. He should have said nothing.

I've been barred from publically saying or doing anything or expressing my opinion because of my job. We all sign confidentiality agreements, and that extends to saying stupid things someone could take the wrong way.

Pretty much every job has these rules, seems that Ray just wants government employees to have more rights and protections than non-governmental employees.

If you identify on your FB page where you work, then it is fair game for the employer to react to.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A police officer eventually lost his job because he said "I'm surprised that nobody offed him yet" in reference to Calypso Louie on Facebook. He never said he'd like to.....or that somebody should.......just the he was surprised nobody hasn't.

He was suspended several months ago and now our local Fox affiliate claims he was recently fired for the comment. So that begs the questions: if this officer made a similar comment about a white radical, would he still be on the job today? Does this officer have a case for a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit?

Nope.

We are all held accountable for what we say on social media under our own names... It's why we all use aliases here.

Isn't a first amendment issue.

Thanks for pointing out I had the wrong amendment. I made the correction.

The people of this country are provided protection from government retaliation when it comes to speech. I don't care if you are a police officer, a lineman, a snow plow driver. We are all protected.

This officer made no threat against anti-semite Louie. He didn't say somebody else should off him. He simply said he's surprised it hasn't happened yet given the fact this anti-American is hate monger.

When coming from a law enforcement officer, it could easily be construed as giving permission for someone to off the guy, He knew the rules when he signed the contract. He should have said nothing.

I've been barred from publically saying or doing anything or expressing my opinion because of my job. We all sign confidentiality agreements, and that extends to saying stupid things someone could take the wrong way.

You don't have a Constitution that guarantees all citizens rights--we do. Our right to free speech is not for speech people agree with. If that were the case, there would be no protection of free speech. Free speech is to allow those who's opinions we don't want to hear as well as the ones we do.

This officer made no suggestion of killing somebody, hoping somebody kills him, asking that somebody kill him. He simply said he was surprised that it didn't happen yet.

 

[JoeB131]

So that's the problem. Your mind inserts words that really aren't there and that's what you are seeing. I think that's a very serious problem Joe. You need to see somebody about that.

Oh, I'd be much happier if racists like you and this guy came right out and said the N-word, it would so much more honest.

But we can read what you say pretty easily.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

So, let me see if I get this straight...

you are ok with the government stripping citizens of their rights while they are on the clock, but not after work? Is that correct?

That is correct. It's just like I have to take a drug test if an officer pulls me over in my truck and decides to send me in for a test. He cannot do the same if I'm driving my car and he has no reasonable suspicion that I"m driving impaired.

Every time I get pulled over, I ask the officer what I did wrong. He usually responds "Oh, nothing is wrong, but I'm going to find something wrong." He then proceeds to check out my entire truck, look inside of the trailer, demands my paperwork, and on a few occasions when they couldn't find anything, look under the hood of my vehicle.

If a cop did that to me in my car, I would have a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit.

Ok, so you are good with the the government stripping citizens of their rights, your only disagreement is when they are allowed to do such thing.

My disagreement is when a citizen is punished for exercising their rights. If this is permitted, then what's the point of having rights if they only apply to some people?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So that's the problem. Your mind inserts words that really aren't there and that's what you are seeing. I think that's a very serious problem Joe. You need to see somebody about that.

Oh, I'd be much happier if racists like you and this guy came right out and said the N-word, it would so much more honest.

But we can read what you say pretty easily.

I'm sure you read a lot of things pretty easily that were never there.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

No I don't think so because the government is paying the employee and has to adhere to the rules set forth. After work, no citizen should be stripped of their rights.

So, let me see if I get this straight...

you are ok with the government stripping citizens of their rights while they are on the clock, but not after work? Is that correct?

That is correct. It's just like I have to take a drug test if an officer pulls me over in my truck and decides to send me in for a test. He cannot do the same if I'm driving my car and he has no reasonable suspicion that I"m driving impaired.

Every time I get pulled over, I ask the officer what I did wrong. He usually responds "Oh, nothing is wrong, but I'm going to find something wrong." He then proceeds to check out my entire truck, look inside of the trailer, demands my paperwork, and on a few occasions when they couldn't find anything, look under the hood of my vehicle.

If a cop did that to me in my car, I would have a Fourth Amendment violation lawsuit.

Ok, so you are good with the the government stripping citizens of their rights, your only disagreement is when they are allowed to do such thing.

My disagreement is when a citizen is punished for exercising their rights. If this is permitted, then what's the point of having rights if they only apply to some people?

Yet you are ok when a citizen is punished for exercising their rights as long as they are on the clock. So, it is not about citizens being punished for exercising their rights, it is just a matter of when it is ok for it to happen