At the back of the hill

Warning: If you stay here long enough you will gain weight! Grazing here strongly suggests that you are either omnivorous, or a glutton. And you might like cheese-doodles.
BTW: I'm presently searching for another person who likes cheese-doodles.
Please form a caseophilic line to the right. Thank you.

Sunday, September 04, 2016

HUGELY INAPPROPRIATE ACTION BY THE SANTA CLARA POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION

I am appalled at the threat by the Santa Clara Police Officers Association to cherry-pick where and how they serve. Specifically, their threat to take no law enforcement action in matters involving Giants games. Apparently the lives of fans are of less account than the feelings of officers.

Let me quote from a letter that the easily wounded buttercups of the Santa Clara Police Officers Association recently sent to Mr. Jed York of the San Francisco 49ers:

"The 49ers organisation has taken no action to stop or prevent Mr Kaepernick from continuing to make inaccurate, incorrect and inflammatory statements"

"If the 49ers organisation fails to take action to stop this type of inappropriate workplace behaviour, it could result in officers choosing not to work at your facilities."

"Our members -- have the right to do their job in an environment free of unjustified and insulting attacks."


Sorry, no. You do not get to choose. If you refuse to protect the public in an area where it is your job to protect the public, you have no business still being police officers. You will be no more than goons with guns.

Besides, serving the public selectively, isn't that proving Colin Kaepernick's point?


There is also the little matter of police interfering with freedom of speech ....

Where and when have we seen that before?


It seems to me that the Santa Clara Police Officers Association suffers from House Nigger Syndrome, that being the toleration of minority individuals only in so far as they adhere to the dominant ethos.


"You aren't like the other XXXXs, I wouldn't mind you living in my neighborhood at all. I still wouldn't want my daughter to associate with you unsupervised, but sh*t man, you're just like one of us!"


In this country, the police are supposed to serve and protect all members of the public equally, regardless of their politics, religion, or skin tone.

So are members of the judiciary (even though we know that is not the case in Santa Clara).

I for one will not gladly visit a place where the cops pick and choose.

Or where some members of the public get a free pass.

It's probably risky as f*ck there.

Butthurt blues.





==========================================================================
NOTE: Readers may contact me directly:
LETTER BOX.
All correspondence will be kept in confidence.
==========================================================================

3 Comments:

  • At 4:13 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Actually, according to Warren v. District of Columbia, the police have no specific duty to protect individuals.

     
  • At 9:16 AM, Blogger The back of the hill said…

    I know. That's why I framed it terms of the public, a large amorphous mass, and using the threat of inaction.

    The problem is that if maintaining law and order is achieved by shooting large numbers of people, they are fully empowered to do that. Which is not how most people perceive it.

     
  • At 9:34 PM, Anonymous pedantically amphibious said…

    The Santa Clara police can boycott all the Giants' games they want to. They have no juristiction in San Francisco.

     

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

 
Newer›  ‹Older