Ok, here’s what it boils down to:[ul][li]An NYC Police recruit (who obviously passed the physical & psych screening exams) has a Jihad/Sword tattoo on his forearm[]The NYPD doesn’t have any tattoo regulations on the books – Though it still does regulare hair length.[]Whether this recruit got inked during his ‘angry-young-man’ phase, a day after 9/11 or two months ago is not known[]Jihad could mean: (a) to strive, (b) exert utmost effort, or (c) holy war against the infidels[]This recruit’s tattoo choice has caught a few people’s attention[/ul]Extra Credit Questions For Those Who Feel A NYC Police Officer Shouldn’t Have A Jihad Tattoo On Their Forearm?:[ol][]What if the tattoo was on a more inconspicuous area of his body?[]Should the police department write new taboo-tattoo regulations; ala DMV license plate no-no’s?[]What tattoos (other than Jihad) would you consider unacceptable?[/ol]Questions For Those Who Support This Recruit’s Freedom Of Expression:[ol][]Do the Police Departments have a right to set standards for hair length, piercing, facial hair or body art?[]If the meaning of ‘Jihad’ can be construed a couple of different ways, what about a forearm tattoo like:a) ZIONISM – Which for some is a political term for Jewish entitlement & for others (like the UN) a racist term?[/li]b) A HINDU SWASTIKA – Would the 4 dots be required for clarification? (Sometimes dots aren’t used)
c) KKK - Fairly self explanitory; but could symbolize someone’s mother’s initials or Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos?
d) LCN or La Cosa Nostra? Which could refer to the mafia…or be translated to mean “Our Thing”?
e) IRA - Not that Congressman King would have a problem with it, but I imagine a few people might.[]Can you think of any political or religious expressions of freedoms that should disqualify an applicant to a government law enforcement agency?[/ol]
For some reason I don’t think you’re going to have problems with Israelis getting “Zionism” tattoos.
As for the tattoo, I don’t have a problem with it. If the guy passed the psych screenings (which presumably included political questions, and possibly the use of a polygraph) then it’s clear he didn’t mean it as a “war against the infidels” statement. I’m willing to bet that he got it before 9/11, but even if he got it after, it has a legitimate meaning outside the context of terrorism. Though I wonder why it’s not in Arabic, if the guy is so proud of his heritage.
[QUOTE=JohnBckWLD]
[ol][li]What if the tattoo was on a more inconspicuous area of his body?[]Should the police department write new taboo-tattoo regulations; ala DMV license plate no-no’s?[]What tattoos (other than Jihad) would you consider unacceptable?[/ol][/li][/QUOTE]
It probably wouldn’t be an issue.
No. They should have a generic rule that says recruits may be disqualified for presenting a physical appearence that may reasonably be expected to alarm, frighten or disturb a significant portion of the populace, at the sole discretion of the police department. Recruits with questions are encourgaged to speak to their commanding officers about particular situations.
Lots. The burden ought not to be on the department to imagine every possible objectionable body art, but on the officer to make sure it will be alright.
As long as the modifications don’t affect job performance at all, then no, I don’t think they should. Because I think there should be religious/cultural dispensations, but when you come down to it, there’s no way to prove, conclusively, that someone growing out their beard ISN’T doing it for religion or culture. How do you know for sure that the white woman wearing a nosering isn’t converting to Hinduism? Or that the light-skinned guy growing out his beard really isn’t 1/8 Persian and is reclaiming his heritage? You don’t! So everyone has to be accomodated.
Of course, many appearance-altering things may affect performance (waist-length hair, facial piercings that will rip out if a cop is wrestling with a perp), and those should of course be prohibited, though it may be hard to tell in advance what may cause problems. I am pretty sure that cops are not allowed to have long free-flowing hair; every female cop I’ve seen has had either short hair or has it pinned up underneath a hat. So there may be a safety issue with that.
Wouldn’t have a problem with it as long as they were found competent in all other areas, though I wouldn’t mind a few extra questions on the psych screening for such people. (In the case of someone who would get a KKK tattoo for initials, I think they’re too stupid to join the force.)
As said before, I think long hair may cause a problem. Religions that make believers cut off fingers or other parts of their body, that’s a big no-no. Any cultural ritual that compromises the physical integrity of the body (bound feet, stretched necks, piercings in areas that could be easily ripped out by a fleeing perp) in a way that would compromise the cop’s ability to perform would be out. But as long as they can pass the (hopefully rigorous) physical and mental screenings, who cares if they look a bit eccentric? The police might be passing up a great recruit because of something they did when they were young and dumb (and with poor timing, as in the case of the Jihad tattoo).
I’d probably be more likely to put my faith in psycholgical exams if they were more effective in screening out aggressors, hayters, racists and kooks from police forces. Your classification of “KKK tattoo for initials” as “too stupid” is really no more subjective or assumptive as labelling a ‘Jihad’ tattoos as ‘too militant’.
But aren’t they? I am pretty sure that police screens include questions about politics, including the recruit’s feelings about other races, religions, etc. I’m not saying it would be perfect, but any decent psych test should screen out militants. Any cops want to weigh in on what these tests are like?
As a default, given the gross ignorance many Americans have about Islam, I’d side with the recruit just on the general principles of fighting ignorance.
Only insofar as it would interfere with the officers performing their duty. Of course, that begs the question of whether the tattoo qualifies, but then we’re back at square 1 again.
I’d support all of these except for the “KKK” and “IRA” ones, if only because I’m not aware of the non-offensive use of those TLAs being commonplace (though I’m too lazy to check at the moment ).
Only those that violate the police department/city/state/national policies on recruit qualifications, I’d imagine. If someone went to the NYPD and said “I want to be a cop so I can kill [insert religious or ethnic group members here],” I’d kindly ask him to practice his freedoms at a different job.
I’m not sure it’s a Jew at all. Centuries ago, we had the Hermetic Order Of The Golden Dawn. Then, we had Aleister Crowley and his Order Of The Silver Star. Currently, we have Maddona and the Kabbala Defiling Centre. Just last week, a friend told me of chatting with a man who hated Jews, but claimed to have studies Kabbala and was planning on getting an Aleph tattoo.
Ah I was right. The letters (remember to read from right to left folks) are zayin, resh, and vav. The vowels are absent. Obviously, I defer to Alessan’s skill in figuring out what the word is, or is supposed to be.
Back To The OP
Purely in the interest of public relations, I think that the local police chiefs should attempt (through non-coercive methods) to get the recruit to agree to a meeting with local religious leaders. Besides the obvious Christian clergy and rabbis, there should be imams to help explain any theological, doctrinal etc questions the recruit is having trouble answering. After a long and open conversation, the Christians and Jews should be reassured that the recruit is a good man. They tell this to the press. The local population is reassured.
Do the Police Departments have a right to set standards for hair length, piercing, facial hair or body art?
Yes, I think they Do! I think it’s a matter of, you want most of the public to feal comfterbal
in a police officer’s presence, and IMHO that mean a cleean cut look!
Do the Police Departments have a right to set standards for hair length, piercing, facial hair or body art?
Oopss … sorry I hit post too early by accident
Yes, I think they Do! I think it’s a matter of, you want most of the public to feal comfterbal
in a police officer’s presence, and IMHO that mean a cleean cut look!
From what I’ve read, to most Muslims it means the inner struggle to be better and true
to the Muslim religion and Allah.
But the word Jihad with a Sword!!! This does not sound like the inner struggle meaning!
To me in can only represent one thing! Holy War! IMHO dispite the police not
having any law on the books about tattoes, I beleive if this officer is not willing to
remove it, the police have a right to let him go.
Do you think the number 14, with no other indicia would “reasonably be expected to alarm, frighten or disturb a significant portion of the populace?”
None of those are familiar to me, and I daresay most people. However, if he started running in t people who recognized it, officer skinhead should be shitcanned forthwith. The only possible exception was if he previously sought approval to wear a white-power tattoo, and it was granted.
Tattoos are not a civil right; they fall under speech. You no more have the “right” to wear tattoos that will impede your job than you have to use racial epithets.
You cannot be serious. A (possibly former) jihadist nut applies to be a cop, so the police department has to set up a community Religious Studies program? Don’t they have enough problems to deal with as it is?
).
