Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
He’s a corrections officer. If he is employed directly by the State then this is a first amendment violation for sure.
No, there's no property right in employment. Speech which inhibits the state from performing its function can get one fired. But not prosecuted for a crime.
Some people process traumatic events by engaging in gallows humor. And forgive me for being insensitive, but I don't see how this joke mocks the victims. Yes, it does make light of the event itself.
Honestly, the intent of the so called "joke" was to imply that Black people are "trash". Can you not see that?
Do you honestly think he would have come up with that quip if the victims were white?
Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences.
Yes it does. Millions of people might post that meme, they're all not going to get fired. The difference is they were smart enough to not post it under their real identity.
Now if facebook believes dark humor violates their terms and conditions, so be it. But people do have the freedom to make tasteless dark jokes without being detained, just ask dark humor comedians.
Too soon and too stupid. Why on earth would someone post something like that on social media? What is to be gained? On top of THAT if you work for any employer you need to realize anything offensive you post online could be held against you and cause your employer to fire you. It is doubly stupid to post something like that when you work for the government.
He doesn't really care. He's one of those persons who has a bigoted mindset and thinks it's okay to be that way.
Some people process traumatic events by engaging in gallows humor. And forgive me for being insensitive, but I don't see how this joke mocks the victims. Yes, it does make light of the event itself.
I don't care. That is nothing to be joking about, period.
Not necessarily, that post probably violated a departmental policy, and violating policy can result in termination.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Manigault
No, there's no property right in employment. Speech which inhibits the state from performing its function can get one fired. But not prosecuted for a crime.
The government can't have a "policy" that prohibits free speech either. Yes, it has some leeway when it comes to employees but the constitution still applies. In a recent case, a public university professor was fired because he refused to refer to a student by their pronoun of choice. The 5th Circuit agreed that the decision violated the professor's free speech and religious rights:
He won even though his speech was directed at a specific student in the classroom. I think it's going to be a harder case than people think if this guy sues as his speech had nothing to do with his employment and was made from a personal social media account.
In a recent case, a public university professor was fired because he refused to refer to a student by their pronoun of choice. The 5th Circuit agreed that the decision violated the professor's free speech and religious rights:
He won even though his speech was directed at a specific student in the classroom. I think it's going to be a harder case than people think if this guy sues as his speech had nothing to do with his employment and was made from a personal social media account.
Well, a professor's job is to lecture, even on controversial topics. That promotes the educational function. As you sated, this guy's job is not to cause disruptive and divisive controversy.
Honestly, the intent of the so called "joke" was to imply that Black people are "trash". Can you not see that?
I'm being 100% honest when I say that no, I did not interpret the joke in this manner. The whole "Cleanup on Aisle 5" thing has been used as the punchline of many, many jokes over the years. Of course, if you interpreted the joke in the manner that you stated, then I can certainly understand why you would find it to be unspeakably offensive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddie gein
Do you honestly think he would have come up with that quip if the victims were white?
Given the large number of jokes that exist about Ford's Theater and the Titanic and the Hindenburg and the Challenger and other disasters in which the victims have been mostly or entirely white people, I would say yes, he would have.
The government can't have a "policy" that prohibits free speech either. Yes, it has some leeway when it comes to employees but the constitution still applies. In a recent case, a public university professor was fired because he refused to refer to a student by their pronoun of choice. The 5th Circuit agreed that the decision violated the professor's free speech and religious rights:
He won even though his speech was directed at a specific student in the classroom. I think it's going to be a harder case than people think if this guy sues as his speech had nothing to do with his employment and was made from a personal social media account.
In LE or corrections, they certainly can, it's usually something along the lines of actions or behaviors that diminish the public trust in the agency. A quick google search will reveal a litany of Officers fired because of something they posted on FB.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
