150 officers warned over Facebook posts

reply to post by Misterlondon


Forget about it I alerted the mods, it's in their court now.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

The linked article is long on claims of ill behavior and short on quotes of what was said. From this side of the pond, it just looks like more British Orwellian Marching.

When you have officers who express racist, homophobic and sexist opinions on FB, being paid by the public in a position of trust, they have to be dealt with.
It's not Orwellian to demand that these bigots are not permitted to be paid by our tax revenues to abuse and harass people.

In the UK, there is a deep distrust between the police and the public. That's not because the public are all criminals, it's because officers here have routinely been caught manipulating cases to protect their own failures, abusing people for the color of their skin or their sexual identity, or caught taking bribes and being in the pockets of those who have money and influence.

We do not accept bigots in our police forces here, and when they are found to be racist, homophobic and sexist they are disciplined. That kind of attitude affect their job, and it harms the trust between the public and them even further.
If anything, they didn't go far enough. They probably should have sacked all of them.

Just like the NYPD officers caught on forums and social networks boasting about their opportunity to beat up protesters - they should have been fired too!

reply to post by boymonkey74


Don't worry, I understand what you mean.

For the rest, there IS a difference between being on FB with a large group of people you actually know in real life, and being on a forum where maybe one person you know might lurk, but not know who you are.

It's not that hard to figure out the risks to you on FB, with friends, family and colleagues having access to things that you wouldn't be posting on random forums, and the ability to use it against you directly in your life.

I've had this experience with two colleagues who were friends. One of them was infatuated with a colleague and would often post quite embarrassing messages when drunk. Our boss had access to that, and the guy was called in and given a warning for harassment. If the guy had been posting derogatory comments about the company or the people he worked with, he should expect to face consequences for that.

www.nytimes.com...

Protect and serve alright.

reply to post by thisguyrighthere


No more so than the egos and stupidity of people who make these types of comments.


Learn chain of command and the term garrity rights then get back to me.

reply to post by Misterlondon


It is. I knew a Border Patrol Agent that used his power to stalk and harass his ex wife (having boyfriends arrested, etc).

But I am also pretty aware of how these types of bland statements can be used to cover up things like when Bush fired all those Federal Prosecutors. It was politically motivated, hidden in a skin of performance related rhetoric.

People should not be sued for quoting you. Nor should you be sued for disclosing the reasons behind the termination of public employees, paid for with tax dollars.

I am not making excuses for crappy cops. I hate crappy cops (and relish the very few decent ones). i am ranting against the lack of transparency in the politically motivated actions of todays world.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by boymonkey74

 

The linked article is long on claims of ill behavior and short on quotes of what was said. From this side of the pond, it just looks like more British Orwellian Marching.

exactly and it is good that our police are eating the same crow we are, then if things go terribly wrong, more will side with citizens. at least that's how i view it.

reply to post by boymonkey74


Why should it be forgotten about?? We are part of the community, we don't have a right to know if this accusation is true or false? (both rhetorical no reason to derail the thread anymore)

Maybe you should of let the mods pick it up on their own so things like this get a chance to stay out in front of us longer instead of swept under the carpet so quickly if it is in fact true. No reason for brownie points versus subs safety. You might want to look around at what is going on in the world right now IMO.

Originally posted by boymonkey74


It isnt just the normal folk who cross the line with social media sites and their professional lives.
Iam glad these cops have been disciplined over what they have written on these sites.
I used to be on facebook but I got out of it when I realised what a danger it can be.
I used to see confidential infomation be posted on it about my patients I look after and all sorts.
Heck when I was drunk and went on facebook...well a few times I had a red face going into work.
Good to see that our force sacked the racist officer without notice too.

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Ive been a cop for several years and removed facebook...the problem I had was I had facebook in college and when I crossed over into my professional career I had too much history on it...not that it was bad, but Id consider some of it inappropriate considering the position I hold (bad jokes, drunk photos, etc). I removed my account very early on, since then ive seen our department and several others incorporate a policy in our rules stating we cant post anything online that would cause any kind of bad judge of character. The way it is written is so subjective....I just assume..if you have a professional career...remove social media sites or go by a nickname for any career path these days. The world is changing!

Police Officers should behave when they are both on and off duty however we are not robots and some do make mistakes from time-to-time. Facebook is one of them social media websites which I only use to keep in contact with long lost friends and former work colleagues. Its also a useful tool to keep up-to-date with many other things. You do get a few bad apples, the minority doesn't reflect the majority.