New York Firearms Forum banner
1 - 20 of 62 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,168 Posts
I still cannot, and never will, get on board with the condemnation of the officer who voiced his opinions on Facebook. You cannot speak of citizens and LEO's being the same, then support decreased 1st Amendment protections for the officers. If he was in uniform, on duty, I'd have no problem with job sanctions or even firing because during job time we should be held to a higher standard. But off-duty, if a cop is no different than a civilian, then that applies to everything, especially Constitutionally protected rights.

My belief is very clear: we are all equal under the eyes of the law. I've never wavered on that. Except while performing sworn duties, the rights and privileges of LEO's should be exactly the same as the citizens they are sworn to protect. Be it gun laws, speech or any other right afforded to American citizens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,183 Posts
Many folks have and would get fired from their jobs over unpopular statements on their facebook, one of the first things a job will do when you apply is try to find your facebook. Sounds like he was treated equally.

What sickens me is the rifle pointing goon gets to get out without criminal charges, with his pension. Its bs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,136 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
The only real issue that I see with this officers rant is the threat of death and the killing/taking out the people in the protest.

In his words "put down like rabid dogs". These are his words and thoughts. Does he really mean this statement or is he just speaking out of frustration? Can he completely separate himself from the thoughts of putting them down while on duty?

I am a bit torn on this issue, I admit. I believe in all rights under the Constitution to include the First Amendment. Sometimes there are Consequences to ones actions and words. We have freedom of Speech but you cannot stand in front of the White House and scream that you are going to kill POTUS. You cannot be on a commercial airline talking about blowing up the plane and not expect to get hemmed up.

Like I stated,, I am a bit torn on this subject.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,743 Posts
Note to self: Self, don't comment about work related issues on social media. Got it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,999 Posts
Many folks have and would get fired from their jobs over unpopular statements on their facebook, one of the first things a job will do when you apply is try to find your facebook. Sounds like he was treated equally.

What sickens me is the rifle pointing goon gets to get out without criminal charges, with his pension. Its bs.
and many any have sued and won for such actions. Some of you guys who support the officer being fired are the same that say officers should speak out against the safe act. Imagine if airbourne got in trouble for his pro-2nd comments. Do u think he should be fired as well. It did fly in the face of his mayors stated position both former and current mayor. Just something to think about
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
I still cannot, and never will, get on board with the condemnation of the officer who voiced his opinions on Facebook. You cannot speak of citizens and LEO's being the same, then support decreased 1st Amendment protections for the officers. If he was in uniform, on duty, I'd have no problem with job sanctions or even firing because during job time we should be held to a higher standard. But off-duty, if a cop is no different than a civilian, then that applies to everything, especially Constitutionally protected rights.

My belief is very clear: we are all equal under the eyes of the law. I've never wavered on that. Except while performing sworn duties, the rights and privileges of LEO's should be exactly the same as the citizens they are sworn to protect. Be it gun laws, speech or any other right afforded to American citizens.
You can get fired for speech regardless of who employs you. Donald sterling ring a bell? What he said wasn't illegal (legally protected speech) yet he was removed from his position with the Clippers.

If you do anything that goes against the interest of your employer, inside work or out, it has work consequences. The first amendment only protects you from being prosecuted for legally protected speech. No one prosecuted this cop, he just lost his job.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,584 Posts
Three prior incidents?! what is this, baseball?! Cops are supposed to protect the public. If they commit any major civil rights violation or otherwise, they should be removed from the force immediately. It shouldn't get to the point where he has the opportunity to point a rifle at someone who is not posing a lethal threat to him. There are so many qualified applicants out there. The ratio of police applicants to jobs is like hundreds to one across the country right now. They're bound to find someone good for the job if they do a good background investigation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,183 Posts
and many any have sued and won for such actions. Some of you guys who support the officer being fired are the same that say officers should speak out against the safe act. Imagine if airbourne got in trouble for his pro-2nd comments. Do u think he should be fired as well. It did fly in the face of his mayors stated position both former and current mayor. Just something to think about
Theres a slight difference between an officer speaking their mind on the subject of the 2A and an officer going on social media saying things like "put down like rabid dogs". (but you enjoy a little misdirection from time to time, painting apples orange does not make them oranges)

If a LEO's views on the second ammendment that they publicly profess include killing anti gun people than yeah, I suppose your comparison would be valid and yes the officer in both the real and hypothetical case should lose their jobs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,999 Posts
Theres a slight difference between an officer speaking their mind on the subject of the 2A and an officer going on social media saying things like "put down like rabid dogs". (but you enjoy a little misdirection from time to time, painting apples orange does not make them oranges)

If a LEO's views on the second ammendment that they publicly profess include killing anti gun people than yeah, I suppose your comparison would be valid and yes the officer in both the real and hypothetical case should lose their jobs.
Yes his comments were extreme but to some the 2nd admendment is seen the same way. Off duty comments are just that. If he vents off duty but doesn't exhibit those behaviors , then he can say it. I understand why the departments did what they did, and hopefully they will pay the price. There are other ways to handle it. If it a comment made out of stress of being out there, it is understandable venting. Their department had other options from a psych review for possible stress disorder to other options. Firing for comments made off duty is a violation of his 1st admendment rights and if he sues it hope he wins. And don't necessarily agree with his views either as of the other examples I will mention.

I remember after the a near lumina incident, the NYC police commish transfered a lot of cops of Haitian decent to that preceinct . Many who were transfered did not wish to work there but were transfered because of the color of their skin and of their heritage . It helped cool some of the community but some of the officers sued. No one wants to be forced to work in a crappy area because of their heritage. It was the right move as far as the Nypd and the community was concerned but the officers rights were still violated . I have seen officers in trouble for calling housing projects "housing projects" or " projects" instead of the new PC term of " urban housing developments" eventhough the sign on the property states the blah blah housing project. Imagine airbourne getting trouble for using the term projects in the story I mention in this post for an off duty comment. I hope the officers in this case win money. There was a case with firefighters who were in a racist themed float at a parade in NYC. They never said they worked for the FDNY but were putted and disciplined/ fired as a result. Again, violation of their rights. And don't think that gun ownership is not the next PC thing to attack. They even stated their goal . Thirty years ago you could call someone in training a pansy . Try that now in most places- it could happen to gun ownership. And speaking against a stated policy has more chance of being disciplined in many circles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,183 Posts
Yes his comments were extreme but to some the 2nd admendment is seen the same way..
Once again, painting that apple orange does not make it an orange and the two really arent compatible, the fact that you have to say "to some" for one and onot the other makes all the difference. .He was basically threatening to kill people, you really believe thats protected speech? Of course you do, your truebeliever2013, defender of the police state.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,234 Posts
I still cannot, and never will, get on board with the condemnation of the officer who voiced his opinions on Facebook. You cannot speak of citizens and LEO's being the same, then support decreased 1st Amendment protections for the officers. If he was in uniform, on duty, I'd have no problem with job sanctions or even firing because during job time we should be held to a higher standard. But off-duty, if a cop is no different than a civilian, then that applies to everything, especially Constitutionally protected rights.

My belief is very clear: we are all equal under the eyes of the law. I've never wavered on that. Except while performing sworn duties, the rights and privileges of LEO's should be exactly the same as the citizens they are sworn to protect. Be it gun laws, speech or any other right afforded to American citizens.
I'm with you on this one. 1st Amendment all the way. Firing him is a crime.. period. The other cop should have been fired and charged with a felony and should have lost everything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,234 Posts
Theres a slight difference between an officer speaking their mind on the subject of the 2A and an officer going on social media saying things like "put down like rabid dogs". (but you enjoy a little misdirection from time to time, painting apples orange does not make them oranges)

If a LEO's views on the second ammendment that they publicly profess include killing anti gun people than yeah, I suppose your comparison would be valid and yes the officer in both the real and hypothetical case should lose their jobs.
If he was saying that while in uniform, I would definitely agree with you. However, we still have 1st amendment rights in our lives. Many of us had said things about ******* .. I don't see the difference here. You may not like what he had to say , but you better support his right to say it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,183 Posts
If he was saying that while in uniform, I would definitely agree with you. However, we still have 1st amendment rights in our lives. Many of us had said things about ******* .. I don't see the difference here. You may not like what he had to say , but you better support his right to say it.
So say I work in a hospital, I go on my social media sight and say I think that every one of those sick bastards at St. Mercy's hospital should be euthanized in their sleep. Do you think the hospital will let me keep my job? Lets say I work as a crossing guard and on my social media I say that I think all those mouthy little bastard kids should get run over, do you think Ill keep my job? Freedom of speech is one thing and Im all for it. Your job doenst have to keep you employed if they dont like what you say on your on or off time. Im not advocating for the officer to be charged with a crime, as he has the right to say what he said, but I also dont dispute that his employer has the right to dismiss him based on his actions. Freedom of speech doesnt necessarily alleviate you from the consequences of what you say
 

·
Postmaster General
Joined
·
23,073 Posts
If he was saying that while in uniform, I would definitely agree with you. However, we still have 1st amendment rights in our lives. Many of us had said things about ******* .. I don't see the difference here. You may not like what he had to say , but you better support his right to say it.
He absolutely has a right to say it!

And they absolutely have a right to can him.

Duck Dynasty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,514 Posts
He absolutely has a right to say it!

And they absolutely have a right to can him.

Duck Dynasty.
Duck dynasty = private corporation
Municipal government = government

Only one of these is restrained by the 1st Amendment.

(although caselaw suggests that they can fire him, I happen to agree with Airborneguy that they shouldn't be able to)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,640 Posts
I would say dial it back a bit:
1) if the horridly biased media did not engage in character assassination of officer Wilson and ascribe undeserved martyrdom to a violent POS robber-CAUGHT ON TAPE ROBBING;

2) if the misguided and angry members of the community did not hold the Ferguson Police and the city hostage to unjustly condemn officer Wilson before a grand jury can even begin to be convened;

3) and if there were evidence from witnesses WITH voracity to believe officer Wilson acted inappropriately,

and these officers made such comments that would be another matter, HOWEVER given how this injustice against officer Wilson has played out in the media, I am outraged and I am not a fellow officer, when history is rewritten before your eyes by politicians and the media, it is hard not to vent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,234 Posts
So say I work in a hospital, I go on my social media sight and say I think that every one of those sick bastards at St. Mercy's hospital should be euthanized in their sleep. Do you think the hospital will let me keep my job? Lets say I work as a crossing guard and on my social media I say that I think all those mouthy little bastard kids should get run over, do you think Ill keep my job? Freedom of speech is one thing and Im all for it. Your job doenst have to keep you employed if they dont like what you say on your on or off time. Im not advocating for the officer to be charged with a crime, as he has the right to say what he said, but I also dont dispute that his employer has the right to dismiss him based on his actions. Freedom of speech doesnt necessarily alleviate you from the consequences of what you say
As long as you are not prevented from saying what's on your mind and broadcasting your opinion but I'm also for full rights for employers.

The first doesn't protect your freedom of speech in the private sector. There could be other violations that take place in a scenario like this (in the private sector) that dance in the anti-discrimination laws. The problem here is, he works for the public sector and the government CANNOT prevent you from using your freedom of speech when you are operating in a non-public context e.g. "i'm off work and in the privacy of my own home". See Google Scholar

...and synopsis here: Terminated New Jersey Police Officer's First Amendment Claim Fails After Federal Court Finds Retaliation Based on Mistaken Perception of Free Speech Not Actionable - National Police and Fire Labor Blog

Short of it: An employer cannot retaliate for your use of protected speech.

Bottom line is, can you prove it was retaliatory and thus an punishment for your expressions..

I don't believe Threats are protected speech. Watts v. United States (1969).
 
1 - 20 of 62 Posts
Top