The idea that the officers should be fired over this is ridiculous, but their “protest” was also ridiculous. Especially considering the department had asked people to refrain from demonstrating at the funeral “out of respect for the families.”
During the Dinkins administration some cops protesting against him held aloft signs that said “fire the washroom attendant” which was certainly vastly more offensive than anything done at the funeral and AFAIK they didn’t get fired so I think anyone who thinks the Mayor could do anything to these cops is dreaming.
Well, they have a strong union. But that’s a good union, not like a teacher’s union, which is a bad union.
Yeah, and in that order you need to bring in the state police and the national guard mp battalions, and stand down the entire NYPD. While your thinking a handful is <100, the entire force is going to react as one.
Da Mayor should pick his battles and ignore this one. Not that it really matters, he is a one timer.
Declan
Who said re-education camps don’t work!
Oh, Merciful Og, this is going to get worse. So very much worse.
The point is that it was being done in public with the deliberate intent of being seen doing it, and that they did it in uniform, implying that they are acting in their capacity as police rather than as concerned private citizens.
I’m not entirely sure that would be a bad idea.
That’s, at best, an interesting opinion. Got any case law to back it up?
from the OP -
fyi- De Blasio isn’t the one who is saying that these police officers are insubordinate or that they should be fired. That is the opinion of Senegoid, and the usual cop-haters. Even De Blasio isn’t that stupid.
The city of New York has a contract with the police union. I doubt that it includes an article that requires officers to look lovingly upon the De Blasio.
If De Blasio did attempt to fire hundreds of officers because they refused to look at De Blasio’s digitalized image, or gaze upon the De Blasio magnificence in person, there would be union grievances, law suits, and, possibly, an attempted recall by the public to remove the De Blasio.
I’m surprised. You object to the police acting in a military fashion but you would not object to the military acting in a military fashion. Martial law is better than no law?
Were you born an asshole or do you suffer from some medical condition that makes you sound like an asshole?
It was his comment about having to train his kid: “we’ve had to literally train him, as families have all over this city for decades, in how to take special care in any encounter he has with the police officers who are there to protect him.”
His kid is black and the comment indicates that he thinks NYPD is more likely to do harm to his kid than to help him.
It was a shameful, ignorant thing to say and I think he should resign his office immediately if not sooner.
This is actually kind of a giant sucking whirlpool for Smapti’s particular issues. Anytime there is the possibility of more authority more absolutely applied, he’ll go for it. So this doesn’t surprise me much, regardless of his other political leanings.
I object to civil servants who openly disrespect and show contempt for their legitimate superiors.
Bad comparison. Why is the NYPD turning their backs on DeBlasio? Because he called for reform and pointed out that there’s a problem. Why would the soldiers turn their backs on Bush? Maybe because he lied his way into a pointless, unwinnable war? Hmm, yeah, totally the same situation.
And it gets even worse when you consider the issue I mentioned back on page two. What’s the fight about, here? Bad apples within the police department, racism, and the fear people have when dealing with the police, compounded by numerous high-profile cases of some highly questionable homicides. By turning their backs on DeBlasio, what are these cops telling the world? What message are they sharing? Certainly not one that inspires confidence in the police, I’ll tell you that much! They are directly contributing to the atmosphere of fear and mistrust, and telling people “We take care of our own; fuck everyone else”. That’s a problem. That’s a big problem.
We can’t fire them for this. Free speech is free speech. But this attitude problem is really at the core of everything else. This Us-Vs.-Them mentality held by many in the police force, that means that we cannot trust them to take care of problems within their own ranks. That’s fucked up.
I think the outrage here is entirely justified. These cops did something phenomenally stupid and disgraceful, something that hurts them and everyone else.
No, it doesn’t. I was taught as a kid to take special care with scissors; that doesn’t mean people thought that I was more likely to stab myself than cut some paper, it just means they thought there was risk enough that a warning was worth it.
According to your linked article -
*Judge Scheindlin’s decision grapples with the legacy of Terry v. Ohio, a 1968 ruling by the Supreme Court, which held that stopping and frisking was constitutionally permissible under certain conditions. But she said that changes to the way the New York Police Department employed the practice were needed to ensure that the street stops were carried out in a manner that “protects the rights and liberties of all New Yorkers, while still providing much needed police protection.”
The judge found that the New York police were too quick to deem suspicious behavior that was perfectly innocent, in effect watering down the legal standard required for a stop.*
However, Scheindlin was subsequentially booted off the case :eek: and the De Blasio administration dropped the stop-and-frisk appeal instead of letting the matter be settled in the court. Which is only one of the reasons that people, including the police, are pissed off at De Blasio.
*August 6, 2014
The de Blasio administration on Wednesday formally dropped the city’s appeal of rulings in lawsuits involving the NYPD’s use of stop-and-frisk tactics.
…Manhattan federal Judge Analisa Torres was assigned to the case in November after the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals booted Judge Shira Scheindlin, who made the initial ruling that the policing tactic was unconstitutional, questioning her impartiality.*
It seems to me that the De Blasio administration (aka De Blasio) should have allowed to case to proceed thru the courts for a proper decision.
Considering the De Blasio was elected on an explicitly pro-police reform platform by a wide majority of New Yorkers, the need for which has only been demonstrated in spades by recent events, your last scenario seems highly unlikely. It’s equally if not more likely that support for the De Blasio increases as a result of the desperate, hysterical measures taken by the PBA to jockey for advantage in their contract dispute with the De Blasio and disagreement with him on a host of other issues. But your political analysis may be more astute than mine.
Because telling the fucking truth is SOOO impolite…