Seattle Cop Facing Termination for Posting Video in Support of Constitutional Rights

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • joppaj

    Sheepdog
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Apr 11, 2008
    46,470
    MD
    Not going to argue what he said but you don’t have freedom of speech without consequence when you are in your employers car and wearing your employers uniform, probably on your employers dime.

    This.

    Say whatever you want. Say it as a representative of the Dept and you risk disciplinary action. That's pretty clear in any Social Media General Order that I've ever seen.
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,691
    Just another working-class guy who has had it with the BS rolling downhill. The support his position has garnered him is a reflection of the number of people who agree with him, and are willing to put their money where their mouths are.

    That said, I sent him a small donation myself. I suspect he will be needing it.
     

    welder516

    Deplorable Welder
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    27,312
    Underground Bunker
    So by the Department terminating his employment , to me they are saying they do not believe in their oaths of office to follow the laws and constitution of the USA . That is what I read into it and that action supports my thoughts .
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    So by the Department terminating his employment , to me they are saying they do not believe in their oaths of office to follow the laws and constitution of the USA . That is what I read into it and that action supports my thoughts .

    I think the concern is that if they allow one officer to make policy speeches from their cruiser, while in uniform (and thus invoking the department's, and thus the city/county/state government's tacit endorsement), then they are in no position to stop other officers from making their own agency-backed public statements about ... owning pit bulls, the whole spectrum of 2A positions, pro/anti religious sentiments, stock buying/selling advice, opinions about political parties, abortion, gay marriage, tax rates, foreign relations, military duty, public schools, or a thousand other hot-button topics.

    The uniform invokes the agency. The agency has legal and public affairs officers for a reason. So no matter how righteous this cop's thoughts (and indeed, he's on the money), the issue is the agency-wide chaos that would ensue if every officer could publicly say whatever crosses their mind, under the color of their uniform's (and thus government's) authority.
     

    randomuser

    Ultimate Member
    Nov 12, 2018
    5,778
    Baltimore County
    I think the concern is that if they allow one officer to make policy speeches from their cruiser, while in uniform (and thus invoking the department's, and thus the city/county/state government's tacit endorsement), then they are in no position to stop other officers from making their own agency-backed public statements about ... owning pit bulls, the whole spectrum of 2A positions, pro/anti religious sentiments, stock buying/selling advice, opinions about political parties, abortion, gay marriage, tax rates, foreign relations, military duty, public schools, or a thousand other hot-button topics.

    The uniform invokes the agency. The agency has legal and public affairs officers for a reason. So no matter how righteous this cop's thoughts (and indeed, he's on the money), the issue is the agency-wide chaos that would ensue if every officer could publicly say whatever crosses their mind, under the color of their uniform's (and thus government's) authority.


    Maybe the agency should have come out instead of just one officer. If they did that it would have let people think that there were more good apples in the bunch.
     

    Bob A

    όυ φροντισ
    MDS Supporter
    Patriot Picket
    Nov 11, 2009
    30,691
    Maybe the agency should have come out instead of just one officer. If they did that it would have let people think that there were more good apples in the bunch.

    If they did that, the agency would be the target of the numerous anti-2A politicians in Washington state. Taking such a stance in such a state would jeopardise the entire agency.

    They'd probably have to replace it with Antifa.
     

    welder516

    Deplorable Welder
    MDS Supporter
    Jun 8, 2013
    27,312
    Underground Bunker
    I think the concern is that if they allow one officer to make policy speeches from their cruiser, while in uniform (and thus invoking the department's, and thus the city/county/state government's tacit endorsement), then they are in no position to stop other officers from making their own agency-backed public statements about ... owning pit bulls, the whole spectrum of 2A positions, pro/anti religious sentiments, stock buying/selling advice, opinions about political parties, abortion, gay marriage, tax rates, foreign relations, military duty, public schools, or a thousand other hot-button topics.

    The uniform invokes the agency. The agency has legal and public affairs officers for a reason. So no matter how righteous this cop's thoughts (and indeed, he's on the money), the issue is the agency-wide chaos that would ensue if every officer could publicly say whatever crosses their mind, under the color of their uniform's (and thus government's) authority.

    I get the terms of his employment , but more important then employment is the oath they all took when signing up for the job .
    It just shows to me there are more officers willing to follow orders , including the command staff that will come down on this officer .

    We all seen or read about history of people just following orders , usually they are on the wrong side of the law in the long run .
     

    Occam

    Not Even ONE Indictment
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 24, 2018
    20,239
    Montgomery County
    I get the terms of his employment , but more important then employment is the oath they all took when signing up for the job .
    It just shows to me there are more officers willing to follow orders , including the command staff that will come down on this officer .

    We all seen or read about history of people just following orders , usually they are on the wrong side of the law in the long run .

    Two separate issues. Knowing which officers won’t destroy their careers by staking our positions on social media while in uniform is NOT the same as knowing which ones will choose not to seek out opportunities to lock up someone for getting (or giving) a haircut.
     

    MigraineMan

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 9, 2011
    19,109
    Frederick County
    This.

    Say whatever you want. Say it as a representative of the Dept and you risk disciplinary action. That's pretty clear in any Social Media General Order that I've ever seen.

    My Kingdom for consistency in enforcement. Len Foxwell has been parading his vitriol around on Facebook, with "Chief of Staff, Comptroller of Maryland" emblazoned across the top of the landing page. If the Intro section said something benign, like "Concerned citizen, Father of several juvenile delinquents" I might be more concessional, but it's clear he's "wearing" his employer's uniform here. Is he subject to State regulations on reporting and data retention? AG Frosh's office doesn't seem to think so.
     

    Attachments

    • Screenshot_2020-04-22_11-25-54.jpg
      Screenshot_2020-04-22_11-25-54.jpg
      91.4 KB · Views: 305

    Biggfoot44

    Ultimate Member
    Aug 2, 2009
    32,884
    He must not have liked his job/ career field , and been looking for a creative way to resign .
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,680
    This.

    Say whatever you want. Say it as a representative of the Dept and you risk disciplinary action. That's pretty clear in any Social Media General Order that I've ever seen.

    Government employee in generally. If you in anyway represent yourself as speaking on behalf of the government, and that’s as simple as saying “I I am biff, I work for the USDA, what I believe is...”

    Your free speech rights end. If you say something solely in your own capacity and do nothing that can reasonably connect you to your government employer, you have pretty broad free speech. More so than someone working for a private employer does (where at least in at Will states your employer can absolutely terminate you for what you say in your own time).
     

    lazarus

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 23, 2015
    13,680
    My Kingdom for consistency in enforcement. Len Foxwell has been parading his vitriol around on Facebook, with "Chief of Staff, Comptroller of Maryland" emblazoned across the top of the landing page. If the Intro section said something benign, like "Concerned citizen, Father of several juvenile delinquents" I might be more concessional, but it's clear he's "wearing" his employer's uniform here. Is he subject to State regulations on reporting and data retention? AG Frosh's office doesn't seem to think so.

    Because his boss is blatantly corrupt. Another example, Have you seen Trump take action against any of his senior officials who have regularly broken the hatch act? Nope, not at all.

    Usually the higher up in an organization you go, the more immune you are to that kind of stuff. Though if your boss is actually principled it doesn’t matter because they will still come down on you like a ton of bricks.
     

    Norton

    NRA Endowment Member, Rifleman
    Staff member
    Admin
    Moderator
    May 22, 2005
    122,856
    He may be right when it comes to the message, but he effectively resigned the second he sent the message while in uniform. There's absolutely no defense of that from a legal standpoint.
     

    Alea Jacta Est

    Extinguished member
    MDS Supporter
    He may be right when it comes to the message, but he effectively resigned the second he sent the message while in uniform. There's absolutely no defense of that from a legal standpoint.
    ^^^^^This.

    In my experience, you can be a public employee and be entitled to your opinion. How and where you choose to express your opinion varies in risk to you/your continued employment.

    The more junior you are, the more likely you are to be diddled for expressing your opinion...whether it’s right, wrong or even popular.

    There are exceptions to every rule. If someone has a rabbi/Dutch uncle/guardian angel in the organization, they can and do get away with equally (if not greater) “egregious” behavior because they are protected. It’s no defense to point that out after the fact.

    Wearing a uniform for your employer? Well, ding ding ding, you are generally held to a much higher standard.

    Organizations and bosses reserve the right to ignore Jane or Joe when they say/do X, but screw Sam or Samantha if they say/do the very same X. Get over it. Life ain’t fair.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,943
    Messages
    7,259,756
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom