Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
66 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Two cops take a knee rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Two men of color, in uniform. They were promptly punished for it, because that's what gets you punished in a police department.

https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20170925/englewood/police-of...
15 
 Thumb up
8.20
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Wait, what? The Chicago PD has a policy against political actions/activities/displays while on duty or wearing the uniform. This was emphasized to officers because there were a variety of political displays over the past couple of years, including the one listed in the article you linked to (a MAGA hat prominently placed inside a police car).

The PD is following a policy that they follow consistently. What's the problem with that?

ETA: I'm willing to bet just about every PD has such a policy, too. And they should. And they should enforce it regardless of the cause that the cops choose.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Opposing police brutality and racism not a "partisan political activity". A hat with a campaign slogan of an active politician is.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Erik Henry
United States
Houston
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
Opposing police brutality and racism not a "partisan political activity". A hat with a campaign slogan of an active politician is.

I suppose it's a "partisan political activity" if one of the two parties is in favor of racism and police brutality. whistle
17 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
Wait, what? The Chicago PD has a policy against political actions/activities/displays while on duty or wearing the uniform. This was emphasized to officers because there were a variety of political displays over the past couple of years, including the one listed in the article you linked to (a MAGA hat prominently placed inside a police car).

The PD is following a policy that they follow consistently. What's the problem with that?

ETA: I'm willing to bet just about every PD has such a policy, too. And they should. And they should enforce it regardless of the cause that the cops choose.


Quit contextualizing the outrage!!!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
I'm willing to bet just about every PD has such a policy, too. And they should. And they should enforce it regardless of the cause that the cops choose.


I completely agree. And yet, the point is, this is a police department that has been mired in all sorts of trouble of its own making, not least the murderous violence directed at people of color, its Homan Square black site, its torture scandals, and a few other things besides.

Obviously, discipline matters. Except when it doesn't.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So they should deviate from policy because this might be popular? That sounds like a bad precedent to set. The department does have problems, but you don't solve them by pandering - you solve them by focusing on them.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
So they should deviate from policy because this might be popular? That sounds like a bad precedent to set. The department does have problems, but you don't solve them by pandering - you solve them by focusing on them.


Not that I disagree, but apparently you have your priorities, and I have mine.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Pennsylvania
msg tools
badge
Bitter acerbic harridan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
Opposing police brutality and racism not a "partisan political activity". A hat with a campaign slogan of an active politician is.


So if two white cops waved a confederate flag, you'd have the same opinion.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DiamondSylph wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
So they should deviate from policy because this might be popular? That sounds like a bad precedent to set. The department does have problems, but you don't solve them by pandering - you solve them by focusing on them.


Not that I disagree, but apparently you have your priorities, and I have mine.


Wow. That's a pretty brazen display of "It's OK if I agree with it." I hope you'll pardon me if I'm not comfortable with that type of legal flexibility.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
So they should deviate from policy because this might be popular? That sounds like a bad precedent to set. The department does have problems, but you don't solve them by pandering - you solve them by focusing on them.

When you implement a policy that is open to subjective interpretation you have to be really careful how you implement it. Kneeling as a BLM style protest didn't start under Trump, it started under Obama. You have to draw a very, very wide circle around activities to make this "partisan".

The CPD does not define what they consider a "partisan political activity" so the only guidance we have is common usage. The Hatch Act, a federal law applying to federal employees defines it as "those activities directed at the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group."
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
Sue_G wrote:
damiangerous wrote:
Opposing police brutality and racism not a "partisan political activity". A hat with a campaign slogan of an active politician is.


So if two white cops waved a confederate flag, you'd have the same opinion.

I wouldn't consider it a "partisan political activity", no. Most likely I would consider it threatening speech.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
When you implement a policy that is open to subjective interpretation you have to be really careful how you implement it. Kneeling as a BLM style protest didn't start under Trump, it started under Obama. You have to draw a very, very wide circle around activities to make this "partisan".

The CPD does not define what they consider a "partisan political activity" so the only guidance we have is common usage. The Hatch Act, a federal law applying to federal employees defines it as "those activities directed at the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group."


You're acting like these cops have been fired or something. It's my understanding that the activity has been flagged for review and that there's a possibility that they'll be reprimanded. That sounds to me like they're following policy closely to avoid precisely the problems that you're talking about. Plus, the CPD's union is about as bulldog as bulldog gets for its members.

I've no earthly idea if there's documentation that spells out the details more - maybe a copy of the memo distributed in January could shed some light if that sees print. But I don't think that referring these officers for possible action is anything terrible. And I don't think that they deserve much in the way of punishment unless there's a history of these types of incidents.

They're following policy. What more do you want?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:

Wow. That's a pretty brazen display of "It's OK if I agree with it."


Not at all, Ken. Just go back to my original comment. You may want to work your way up into high dudgeon by reading something else into them, but my comment expresses fully my feelings on the matter. Like you, I'm for "and" not "either," and already said as much. But my, aren't you in a rush to be upset.

Per Sue's comment, we could summon up the obvious ghastliness of one officer's visible Nazi tattoo in Philadelphia -- while noting that's a matter in which he was cleared, reassuring nobody.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/albertsamaha/they-cant-fire-you-for...

I'd recommend folks follow the ADL socially (particularly Mark Pitcavage); one of the things they've commented about being concerned about is the infiltration of police departments by white supremacists. The two officers being disciplined for taking a knee -- necessarily -- can simultaneously be reassuring reminders that it's "not all cops."
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What did you expect people to read into your "You have your priorities..." comment?

I mean, I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong or I've misunderstood what someone was saying, but I don't really see what meaning you expected to communicate there.

Also, please believe me when I tell you that you haven't seen me upset. I'm not even mildly irked. You'll know when you've actually upset me - it will be quite unmistakable as our longer-term participants can tell you.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pontifex Maximus
United States
CA
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DiamondSylph wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
I'm willing to bet just about every PD has such a policy, too. And they should. And they should enforce it regardless of the cause that the cops choose.


I completely agree. And yet, the point is, this is a police department that has been mired in all sorts of trouble of its own making, not least the murderous violence directed at people of color, its Homan Square black site, its torture scandals, and a few other things besides.

Obviously, discipline matters. Except when it doesn't.


Considering this is the department that had its own version of Guantanamo Prison for "off the books" incarceration/torture you do hit the nail quite on the head
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Damian
United States
Enfield
Connecticut
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
damiangerous wrote:
When you implement a policy that is open to subjective interpretation you have to be really careful how you implement it. Kneeling as a BLM style protest didn't start under Trump, it started under Obama. You have to draw a very, very wide circle around activities to make this "partisan".

The CPD does not define what they consider a "partisan political activity" so the only guidance we have is common usage. The Hatch Act, a federal law applying to federal employees defines it as "those activities directed at the success or failure of a political party, candidate for partisan political office, or partisan political group."


You're acting like these cops have been fired or something. It's my understanding that the activity has been flagged for review and that there's a possibility that they'll be reprimanded. That sounds to me like they're following policy closely to avoid precisely the problems that you're talking about. Plus, the CPD's union is about as bulldog as bulldog gets for its members.

I've no earthly idea if there's documentation that spells out the details more - maybe a copy of the memo distributed in January could shed some light if that sees print. But I don't think that referring these officers for possible action is anything terrible. And I don't think that they deserve much in the way of punishment unless there's a history of these types of incidents.

They're following policy. What more do you want?

The article specifically said they will be reprimanded. I think it's a vague policy that can be used to selectively punish. I don't know what else to tell you. I don't know how much weight a "reprimand" carries, but I could easily see this affecting their future promotion chances if there are equal scoring competitors without "reprimands". I don't think the union much cares because they would be backing one member against another in that case.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DiamondSylph wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
So they should deviate from policy because this might be popular? That sounds like a bad precedent to set. The department does have problems, but you don't solve them by pandering - you solve them by focusing on them.


Not that I disagree, but apparently you have your priorities, and I have mine.


Oh, trust us.... we know.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
damiangerous wrote:
The article specifically said they will be reprimanded. I think it's a vague policy that can be used to selectively punish. I don't know what else to tell you. I don't know how much weight a "reprimand" carries, but I could easily see this affecting their future promotion chances if there are equal scoring competitors without "reprimands". I don't think the union much cares because they would be backing one member against another in that case.


You're reading more into the story and statements than I did, but I found the writing to be pretty horrid and somewhat conflicting.

I also don't know whether this is something that sticks with them and expect that there's various forms of reprimand, some far more formal than others. I do know that unless the union really fell down on the job, there's just about no chance that this is a formal reprimand that will sit on some form of formal record. Just as the reporting on the MAGA hat makes it appear that the officers involved were reprimanded without lasting consequences. One of them was on duty, so it wouldn't appear that any significant time off was involved.

I'll agree with you that the rule as presented in the summary provided is pretty vague. I'd love to find the January memo to see what it said and bet that training materials provide a lot more detail for officers to follow.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
フィル
Australia
Ashfield
NSW
flag msg tools
designer
badge
I've got an 808 and a 303 and a record collection like the ABC
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I wonder if the reprimand will include a paid vacation?
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls

Pennsylvania
msg tools
badge
Bitter acerbic harridan
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
sbszine wrote:
I wonder if the reprimand will include a paid vacation?


Lol
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jamie Hankins
United Kingdom
Southampton
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Political expressions while at work is a difficult issue for any workplace, so I can understand why some workplaces try to discourage such things. At the end of the day, it's hard to come up with standards that are fair and consistent, allow the kinds of expressions that seem 'reasonable' and yet exclude radical and hateful political expressions.

Given that we're talking about a police department, all of the above is even more true, so I can understand why it may seem attractive to implement rigid rules about what kinds of political expressions are okay with an eye to avoid political expressions that are socially divisive.

I'm not sure how far I would want to take this; should police officers avoid celebration of pride events at work or should they not wear a poppy on remembrance day? Yet it also seems inappropriate for police officers to align themselves with particular sections of society (and that includes expressions that put them on one side of a political divide).

I agree that it's a bit missed up that opposition to police brutality and murder is a divisive issue in the USA but that does seem to be the reality.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Taking a knee is a partisan display. It directly conflicts with the current administration's White Nationalism agenda.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Christina Kahrl
United States
Unionville
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
perfalbion wrote:
What did you expect people to read into your "You have your priorities..." comment?

I mean, I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong or I've misunderstood what someone was saying, but I don't really see what meaning you expected to communicate there.

Also, please believe me when I tell you that you haven't seen me upset. I'm not even mildly irked. You'll know when you've actually upset me - it will be quite unmistakable as our longer-term participants can tell you.


I'm glad we both recognize that we're in agreement, especially when the confusion arose over your need to try and invent distinctions that -- as I've noted -- were never there in the first place. I defined my greater concerns; so far, you appear to have none. You drew another phony distinction; I pointed out that it is so.

So, here we are, in agreement, save perhaps on what we apparently identify as priorities when it comes to policing. This seems to offend you, though I haven't the foggiest why. For example, I did not and do not think that you really believe that disciplining cops for taking a knee is equally important to disciplining them for torture, but to get there requires my projecting onto you a virtue that your arguments here have so far failed to articulate.

In this, I'm guilty of the same problem we've identified in the nits you've tried to pick here -- I'm putting something on you that isn't on the page to see. The distinction is that it's something to your credit, instead of reading in something worse. If that's my misconception of you as well as your position, I hope you don't feel obligated to explain why -- I would, after all, much rather think better of you.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DiamondSylph wrote:
perfalbion wrote:
What did you expect people to read into your "You have your priorities..." comment?

I mean, I'm happy to admit when I'm wrong or I've misunderstood what someone was saying, but I don't really see what meaning you expected to communicate there.

Also, please believe me when I tell you that you haven't seen me upset. I'm not even mildly irked. You'll know when you've actually upset me - it will be quite unmistakable as our longer-term participants can tell you.


I'm glad we both recognize that we're in agreement, especially when the confusion arose over your need to try and invent distinctions that -- as I've noted -- were never there in the first place. I defined my greater concerns; so far, you appear to have none. You drew another phony distinction; I pointed out that it is so.

So, here we are, in agreement, save perhaps on what we apparently identify as priorities when it comes to policing. This seems to offends you, though I haven't the foggiest why. For example, I did not and do not think that you really believe that disciplining cops for taking a knee is equally important to disciplining them for torture, but to get there requires my projecting onto you a virtue that your arguments here have so far failed to articulate.

In this, I'm guilty of the same problem we've identified in the nits you've tried to pick here -- I'm putting something on you that isn't on the page to see. The distinction is that it's something to your credit, instead of reading in something worse. If that's my misconception of you as well as your position, I hope you don't feel obligated to explain why -- I would, after all, much rather think better of you.


So "I don't know how else you could expect me to take it" and "If I get angry, you won't be uncertain about it" is somehow now "I'm glad you agree with me and if you don't, I'd rather not hear it?"
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.