Should trooper be fired?

Even though he has no history of ever being bias against minorities, it will always be used against him, if any type of legal situation arises between himself and a minority, and Im sure it would be used against the department as well. Since hes a public servant, he should know that some aspects of his private life will be used against him, if someone sees an oppurtunity to discredit him, no matter how wrong we as individuals think this may be.
I think I would have to fire him to if I was the chief or whomever does the firing, if for nothing more than to protect the credibility of the other officers in the department, becuase you know someone will accuse them of being "guilty by association". Thats my thought on it all.
 
Interesting

Is "not being racist" a BFOQ of being a state trooper? Good question, and I don't know the answer. I tend to think that it is NOT a BFOQ unless and until it is shown that his views cause him to allow this to affect his work, such as evidence that he engages in improper racial profiling, for example. Until then, I think he should keep his job.

In employment at will states, the employer can fire you for any reason or no reason at all. The ONLY thing they can't do is fire you for an improper reason (exercising 1A rights of association being one of them). The force is stupid for saying the real reason, but now the cat is out of the bag, and I think the guy should keep his job - he's exercising the 1st amendment. Unless and until he is shown to break a rule of the force as a result of his views.

"The Constitution does not require law enforcement to employ anyone tied to the KKK."
Click to expand...

No, it does not, as far as the hiring decision process goes. But once hired, the Constitution does indeed prevent a firing for a STATED reason of exercising a fundamental civil right (IINM).
 
I'm a minority (well half of me is anyway, the product of a marriage type that was what drove him to join the Klan in the first place) but I feel on his free time, he has a right to join any group as long as he is a good cop. Would it make it any different if he was a Klan member as a regular joe blow? Most Klan groups I have seen have an overt fear of breaking the law, even distancing themselves from their violent past and condemning other violent right wing groups. Sure it's just PR most of the time but a Cop who shows no signs of biases doesn't seem like to change this late in the game. If you can teach kids racism without facing jail time, why not let an adult make his own, however ignorant or angry, decision if it is not hurting anyone. Freedom is a two way street. Free Speech isn't meant to protect mediocre and unoffensive material or groups. It's meant to protect groups that the majority disagrees with or downright hates/dislikes/etc.

I think the Klan is one of the worst groups to be formed in human history but they have a right to organize just as the NAACP has that same right. Just like I think Fred Phelps and the Westboro Church are probably the most insane and offensive thing to happen to Christianity (this is coming from an atheist) and soldier's families but they have a right to protest. I agree that the new law put into effect may be a littling hindering but it doesn't fully stop their protests.

I feel that yes it can be used against him in any review board but so can his record of being seemingly fair and unbiased on the job. He also sounds like he joined just out of anger and is just venting the way that seemed right. Sure it's kind of ignorant and offensive, but is it really so horrible? He isn't hurting anyone to our knowledge.
 
When I was in the military, we were held to a higher standard than the average civilian. And yes, our first and fourth amendment rights were somewhat abridged.

When my dad was the police chief in our town he, and the other officers were required to be model citizens so as to avoid any possible appearance of impropriety, whether it existed or not.

I think he should stay fired.
 
That's a good point, and I can see both sides of this one. Except that it is well known in the law that when you join the .mil, you specifically give up significant fundamental rights, including not having access to the non-.mil court system. Police officers do not sign on the dotted line, giving away their civil rights like our fighting boys (and girls) do, I don't think.

Thank you for reminding me of the poll, bob - no I had not seen it.
 
So what if NYC or NY state were to decide that being an NRA member was a firing offense for a law enforcment officer?
 
In court it would mean in cases where he has arrested a black it will be brought up.That would prejudice the case .He must either quit the KKK or quit the police.:rolleyes:
 
"I think he should be fired for being stupid enough to join the Klan."

For once, I agree.stupid is as stupid does.How can he be one thing while his klansmanship supports the opposite views?
 
Virginia employee's handbook:

V. UNACCEPTABLE STANDARDS OF CONDUCT (OFFENSES)

A. Not all-inclusive

The offenses set forth below are not all-inclusive, but are intended as examples of unacceptable behavior for which specific disciplinary actions may be warranted. Accordingly, any offense that, in the judgment of agency heads, undermines the effectiveness of agencies' activities, may be considered unacceptable and treated in a manner consistent with the provisions of this section.
 
Be fine with me to fire him for being gay and a scientologist. Also fine with me to fire him for being a Klan member. Unfortunately, being stupid doesn't disqualify him from being an l.e.o., but joining the Klan sure would, if I were in a position to make that decision.
 
Not joining groups which would compromise my perceived fairness and impartiality is spelled out in my contract. (small force in TN)
 
One of those Where do you Draw the Line Things

He is a man and he can do whatever he wants but he must be prepared to face the consequences of his actions. Personally I beleive the man should be fired because of the believes of the group he is affliated with.

Would you want a known memeber of al-qaeda to be a LEO? It's just a group that hates another group of people based on believe. I also think that LEO's should be and ARE held to a higher standard then the rest of society they are paid to protect.

I have no respect for someone who puts on a uniform and is expected to Protect and serve all memeber's of his community and then at night puts on one that says Save Us Good Christian White Folks and down with everyone else. There is NO way he can be impartial and treat everyone fairlly when his veiws are what they are.
 
In court it would mean in cases where he has arrested a black it will be brought up.That would prejudice the case .He must either quit the KKK or quit the police.
Click to expand...

So, if he were, for the sake of discussion, a fervent Democrat and member of the local Democratic Club who voiced strong anti-Bush opinions, would that prejudice the case if the arrestee was a Republican who had a Bush bumper sticker on his car? Should he be forced to either quit the Democrat Party or the force?

I ask this since membership in the KKK or the Knight's Party is not any more illegal than membership in a mainstream political party and the associated clubs.

Who determines what are acceptable groups to belong to?
 
SO Ausser, him being gay is the same as being a part of the Klan?

I could care less what he does in his free time as long as he isn't hurting anyone. Saying hate speech is not hurting anyone. And the Review Board acknowledged that he has been unbiased. You know there are people who can put aside their personal beliefs when they put on a uniform. Not everyone who disagrees with you is stupid or weak-minded.

I knew an ex-parole officer who is a die-hard socialism advocate. I disagree with most of what he says (though Socialism does offer a few good things, it's not a very good system on the whole) but I never once questioned his ability as a parole officer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top