That would blow up in their face at this point. None of them want a challenge to section 1983 now that we know the full text of the law. It would strip them if qualified immunity.
Lol! "Bigoted and discriminatory"! As if they were born a cop, had no choice to be anything other that a cop, and could never be without a uniform or a weapon. Fuck 'em.
My partner was a charge nurse on a psych ward for 16 years. Many of her interactions with police were as follows:
POLICE: buzzes the desk
My Parnter: Yes?
P: This is officer so-and-so with the so-and-so police department. We have a warrant for the arrest of a patient on your ward. Let us in.
MP: Okay, but this is a secure ward and firearms are not allowed. Surrender your weapons at the security office and I'll grant you access to make your arrest when you return.
P: I'M NOT SURRENDERING MY WEAPON!
MP: Well, then can't enter this ward. end of conversation
What happened to those supreme court rulings they were so in favor of, that allowed poor little christians to blatantly discriminate against people they don’t like
That sounds delicious to be able to tell them that. I got fired from a retail job I worked for five years for telling customers about the sign on the door that asks them not to carry. Got unemployment so at least the state knew it was bullshit.
something something gay wedding cake. Last I checked LEO isn't a protected class. And they aren't even denying LEO, just those that come in on-duty and are armed. So yeah, get fucked pigs.
In history. The US cops commit more murder, theft, rape, and assault than any other organization in history. They don’t even have Qualified Immunity, according to the full text of section 1983, but that’s not what was given to SCOTUS in 1982 when they heard Harlow V Fitzgerald.
It’s not prejudice when literally all the evidence supports it. Maybe you’d be process that evidence more clearly without that pig cock cutting off your oxygen supply.
Yes, but they are intelligent, useful to society, and quite friendly with a tiny amount of socialization. None of that is true for the average cop. Remember, they HATE being called a Citizen On Patrol.
In an overwhelming number of situations, yes. Cops are intended to prioritize property over people and convictions over justice. Those who speak out about injustices face retribution from their peers and little defense from their union. Police unions act as criminal legal defense to eschew responsibility.
There have even been legal cases of departments refusing to hire people because they were “too smart”. This is largely speculated to be due to fear of those who are more intelligent speaking out, and having a moral compass of their own rather than blindly following.
Yep. I’m one of them. I applied to the cybercrimes division of the Lexington, KY PD in my naive youth and got an official letter saying they refused to hire me because they were worried that I would “get bored and pursue other employment.” Asked a couple of my lawyer friends and they all agreed that was code for “we’re afraid that you’ll notice all the shit we do, and try to prosecute us” aka, “you’re too smart.”
Used to work contract security. my client was next to a MLB ball field- their parking lot literally was next to the service entrance, so the various staff that weren’t special (concessions, security, etc,) would park there. A lot of their ball game security are moonlighting cops or retired cops… they liked to tail gate after the game… but the city would revoke the license for running a parking lot if we allowed alcohol.
Getting drunken cops to leave your property when the other cops tried to be like “what’s the harm,” etc is no good.
it’s really not that simple. First, if you keep nuisance complaints, they’ll fine you (or in my case, fine my clients. which would have me fired.)
secondly, you annoy the cops enough, they’ll freeze you out regardless of what their policies/rules say, and as a security guard, you’re reliant on them to come save you if you ever have an active shooter or, more likely, just an aggressive asshole who doesn’t like being told they can’t do whatever it is they’re trying to do.
you’re reliant on them to come save you if you ever have an active shooter
This is not a good plan, you need to be responsible for your own safety because you can’t count on the imaginary good guy cops to save you from anything. It may be 30 minutes before they show up, or they may not even show up at all.
That really is a tough one. The only chance you have is to escalate and demand the duty sergeant come down and deal with the problem of his unruly officers or make an extremely public complaint to the media and mayor that will force a response.
Or find a parking/fire violation that the fire department would care about. I’ve seen them put cops in there place a few times. Even pushed a cruiser down the street in Boston when it was double parked in there way.
I wish I’d had a camera phone back then, I’m pretty sure they don’t report those kind of things into logs that end up in the paper.
Fun story time… a couple of friends of mine were walking home after a night of drinking and some cops pull over and get out and say, “two white men in dark clothes just robbed the gas station down the road and you fit that description.” One friend said, “you’re two white men in dark clothes so you fit that description too. I’m going to have to make a citizen’s arrest.” My other friend said the cuffs got put on them at light speed. They got charged with public intoxication. We don’t know if the two white men in dark clothes were ever caught.
Sadly, he passed away. And only in his 20s. And yes, we lost a great comic mind. I say this as someone who has been paid to do stand-up and write comedy: he was far funnier than I will ever be. I still miss him 20 years later.
I’m sorry too, but that’s life. And the older you get, the more friends you lose along the way. I’m just glad we were friends for the time he was alive.
They didn’t actually win. It had the some procedural non-decision that the Colorado bakery case had (i.e. the regulator failed to be sufficiently neutral). They got fined again and that is being appealed. …wikipedia.org/…/Klein_v.
They’ll keep appealing it down to nothing. It’s back in Oregon now, give it a few months. What a waste of tax payer millions. Just make the fucking cake.
This policy doesn’t seem weird to me at all, but I’m Canadian. I’ve seen establishments that don’t allow weapons on site. So except in emergency situations, police officers need to secure their weapon before they enter the store (I think they put them in the gun locker in the trunk of their car?).
If its legal for someone to hypothetically not create a wedding announcement website for gay people because she doesn’t want to serve those kinds of people, then there should be nothing wrong with not wanting to serve armed cops.
One is outright discrimination based on sexual orientation. The other is simply a policy applied to all patrons.
It should absolutely be legal to say ‘no shoes no service’ or ‘has gun no service’ even if it was not legal to discriminate based on sexual orientation/race/gender/etc. They aren’t at all the same thing.
unless you have a bouncer with a wand and proper pat down experience. the patrons will just conceal and not tell you. plenty of places say no guns. but a sign is nothing more than that.
Not in San Fran they wont. They let criminals run rampant but wont let anyone without Trump money get through the concealed carry permit process. Bruen should have fixed that but who knows if Cali will actually listen with Newsom putting that constitutional amendment to neuter the 2nd amendment out there.
SF has an extremely lot violent crime rate, so what exactly do folks need guns like that for? The “high crime rate” is property crime, like theft. Unless folks want to be out here shooting people for smash and grabs.
odds on there being an 'incident' at that location in the near future, and the cops responding stop at dunkin' for coffee and a donut while on the way there....?
Shit coffee, too. And I say this as someone from the northeast and currently living somewhere are nine Dunks within a one mile radius of my current location.
The coffee is better than Starbucks, but that’s not saying much. Starbucks is only considered good because they add so much sugar and shit you can’t taste the coffee.
Really? I’ve had a Starbucks Americano and it was fine. Although that’s espresso, not drip coffee. Drip coffee in general is just swill. Especially when it’s some “breakfast blend” bullshit. I’ve never had a blend that’s good, but most single-origin coffees are fine.
The beans at Starbucks are over-roasted to maintain a consistent flavor across all locations. It doesn’t really matter what you get. Espresso might be slightly better, but it’ll always be over-roasted.
Is being a law enforcement officer a protected class?
Saying something like “I refuse to serve you in the basis of your race” is illegal because race is a protected class. Whereas “I refuse to serve you because your Lemmy hit-takes are dumb” is perfectly legal! Same as refusing to serve armed thugs masquerading as the good guys.
Of course it’s not a protected class. I was responding to the op who said anyone should be able to be turned away, no questions asked. The whole reason we have protected classes is to prevent that sort of broad stroke.
I just had a situation with this at work that I talked to my wife about. A customer wanted us to do something with an image that had full frontal nudity and my bosses had to have a discussion about whether or not to allow it. My wife said, “aren’t they required to?” I pointed out that if that was true, we wouldn’t be able to refuse Neo-Nazis.
…Yeah, do you realize how bad taste it is to compare not letting cops in to Jim Crow discrimination against Black folks? Y’know, the people cops kill a lot?
I see what you’re trying to do, but…can you please not.
Dude said legalize “no questions asked discrimination” and you referenced a very well known example of discrimination in recent history. Seemed like a logical response to me.
Yeah, but the issue is using that particular example in a post talking about police.
Also, as a Black American, it’s really tiring when we and discrimination against us get pulled out to use as examples. Like, just keep us out of it some times.
I don’t know what you’re not getting. Your post was about police specifically. The top comment of this chain days for any reason whatsoever, which could include, but is not limited to, race. The post isn’t wrong, the top level comment here is because some people would use the liberty of blocking anyone they want to ban people of color, which has happened in the past hence the example.
You’re telling me that if the conversation starts with cops, you agree with someone saying “they should be able to turn anyone away, no questions asked.”?
Dude didn’t say discriminating against cops is the same as discriminating against black people.
Everyone is misunderstanding your post. Add the words “your suggested policy could lead back to” before the sign you were referencing. I only finally got that context by reading the entire thread just now
It’s not like they check for concealed carry though. I did security checks for a MLB team for a bit and I definitely waved through guns after they flashed a badge.
You might be interested to know that cops, judges, politicians, and all other government officials don’t actually have Qualified Immunity according to the full text of section 1983 of the federal code. The SCOTUS wasn’t handed the full text in 1982 when they heard Harlow V Fitzgerald. The text was changed illegally in 1874 by one guy when he copied the 1871 Congressional Record into the Federal Register.
Look up “16 crucial words that went missing from a landmark civil rights law” for more info.
(Not OP) Thanks but that particular article is AI generated garbage (or just thesaurus generated plagiarism) - you can tell when they replace technical terms like ‘judgement’ or ‘decision’ with synonyms like ‘choice’
While the Cato Institute are some sort of libertarian think-tank, at least this is a real human-written article, and it links back to some better sources:
Add comment