Baton Rouge cop resigns after text messages wishing someone would "pull a Ferguson" on n*ggers http://randyreport.blogspot.com/2014/09/baton-rouge-cop-resigns-after-text.html ----------------------------------------------- One would always expect an officer of the law to respect the law as well as the citizens they are charged to protect who actually pay their salaries. But as with most things, there is always an exception, such as one who feels differently.
Disagreeable people need jobs too. If this guy performed with competence, what right have we to demand his resignation for a private opinion? I'm not saying I agree with this guy, but absent a breach of the public trust, he should have been allowed to keep his job.
For holding an unpopular opinion? Ever heard of freedom of speech? The First Amendment to the US Constitution was not written to protect popular opinions, but the unpopular ones. Beliefs that are popular need no protection.
You're confusing "freedom of speech" with the inability to provide fair and objective perspective to the public trust that he given.
Where does the article say he was incompetent or did a bad job? It seems to me they asked for his resignation over an opinion. Were he incompetent or not doing his job properly, surely it would have shown up over fifteen years.
I disagree in a minor way. A cop's job performance should be race neutral. Outside of his job he should be allowed to have his own opinions and preferences. I personally do not agree with his opinion in this instance, but I affirm his right to hold it, and to his right to be a cop so long as it doesn't affect his performance of his duties.
It was more than opinion. He actually brought his job into it: He was dumb enough to state that his racist opinions affected how he performs his job. They had no choice but to fire his racist ass. Good riddance too. Racist trash like him shouldn't be walking around with a badge and a firearm.
Wishing someone would do a thing is quite different from making it happen. For instance, I have fantasized many times about kicking my mother-in-law out of my house. It hasn't happened. I dislike this portion of my marriage. That doesn't mean my wife should divorce me or vice versa. I don't feel I'm a bad husband because of this.
I'm not sure how you fantasizing about acting on your dislike of your mother-in-law is equivalent to a cop gleefully texting that he loves targeting people because of their skin color. Every arrest that cop made would be questionable as would his testimony in court. Every defense lawyer that goes up against him would just whip out his texts and cast a big shadow over his motives. He's useless as a cop and as a human being in general. Maybe he can get a job in his local KKK hall sweeping floors or something. Society doesn't need pieces of (*)(*)(*)(*) like him carrying a gun with the full authority of the law.
He never claimed to target Blacks. He simply claimed to enjoy arresting them. Certainly I enjoy parts of my job more than others, but the fact is that I perform them all to the best of my ability. But even if he did in fact target Blacks, would it detract from the fact of their guilt or innocence? All the defense would prove is that there was additional motive to do a good job. Were this cop to be involved in a shooting of a Black, that would be a horse of a different color. Having made his motive plain, he would face additional difficulty in his defense. Let's try a thought experiment. Suppose this cop caught a child molester in the act. Suppose further that he hates child molesters more than he hates Blacks - a reasonable opinion from where I sit. Would the defense lawyer be able to use the cop's bias against child molesters to inject reasonable doubt?
There is no such thing as freedom of speech. We must all agree with the popular opinion and only express the popular opinion. Or be drawn and quartered.
