Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:33 PM Sep 2014

DOJ Tells Ferguson Cops To Stop Wearing 'I Am Darren WIlson' Bracelets

Source: TPM

By CATHERINE THOMPSON Published SEPTEMBER 27, 2014, 12:21 PM EDT

The U.S. Justice Department has asked the Ferguson, Mo. Police Department to order its officers to stop wearing bracelets in support of Darren Wilson, the white officer who fatally shot an unarmed black teenager last month.

The DOJ wrote Friday in a letter to Ferguson police Chief Tom Jackson that the bracelets "upset and agitated" people and "reinforce the very 'us versus them' mentality that many residents of Ferguson believe exists," according to Reuters. The agency wrote that residents told its investigators on the ground in Ferguson that they saw officers who oversaw protest sites Tuesday wearing "I Am Darren Wilson" bracelets.

A letter sent to Ferguson police from the DOJ earlier this week also said investigators had noticed some officers either not wearing or obscuring the name tags on their uniform in violation of the police department's own rules, according to Reuters.

A photo purporting to show a cop wearing the "I Am Darren Wilson" bracelet circulated widely this week on social media:



Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/doj-tells-ferguson-cops-stop-wearing-darren-wilson-bracelets

91 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
DOJ Tells Ferguson Cops To Stop Wearing 'I Am Darren WIlson' Bracelets (Original Post) DonViejo Sep 2014 OP
Those officers should be reprimanded for wearing such offensive bracelets while on duty 3rdwaydem Sep 2014 #1
Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #28
You are getting a couple because you are white??? bravenak Sep 2014 #33
Sounds like an idiot, bravenak. I'm just going by your response 'cause Cha Sep 2014 #59
Name Removed - The Idiot. bravenak Sep 2014 #60
I hear ya.. Ferguson, MOPD will wear these stupid arm bracelets but they won't wear their name Cha Sep 2014 #61
I'm always wondering JustAnotherGen Sep 2014 #76
Once again, this is why cops have a bad reputation tularetom Sep 2014 #2
You're conflating issues or using this to justify an animosity. merrily Sep 2014 #29
Au contraire mon frère tularetom Sep 2014 #40
So, you were hiding an animosity and conflating issues. merrily Sep 2014 #41
I'm not hiding anything particularly "an animosity" tularetom Sep 2014 #43
Your reply #2 did use the OP to justify an animosity, as my reply 29 merrily Sep 2014 #44
Don't extrapolate nationally from your single local experience. kwassa Sep 2014 #63
Public unions are not less powerful tularetom Sep 2014 #64
the problem in those instances demigoddess Sep 2014 #70
You won't catch any sh!t from me... Bryce Butler Sep 2014 #30
Another selective supporter of unions rpannier Sep 2014 #57
Just police unions. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #66
That's the argument the right wing uses against teacher's unions rpannier Sep 2014 #74
You sound like another police apologist friend. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #75
Not an apologist rpannier Sep 2014 #77
I actually have a comprehensive plan, friend. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #79
"Civilian police may not carry the following items as part of routine patrol- firearms, body armor" NickB79 Sep 2014 #80
When seconds count the police and their means to protect... Oktober Sep 2014 #83
They have pepper spray and physical training. Spray the guy and take the knife away. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #84
So just to be clear... Oktober Sep 2014 #85
The police in the UK do a far better job and don t need guns. ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #86
I support intelligent discourse and rational thought... Oktober Sep 2014 #87
Man, going to the store without the fear of being murdered by the police is such a huge cost... ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #88
If that's how you live in NC, I suggest you find somewhere else... Oktober Sep 2014 #89
May I suggest you turn on the news? ncjustice80 Sep 2014 #90
I do.. Regularly... Oktober Sep 2014 #91
I know I'll catch a ration of shit... I don't share the same sympathies toward public unions rpannier Sep 2014 #56
The writer of the article contradicts herself in the headline and the first sentence.... George II Sep 2014 #3
Difference without distinction. Whats the difference between a Cop asking to get out of my car .... marble falls Sep 2014 #5
The distinction is huge. RiverNoord Sep 2014 #17
The biggest distintion is there is a process of bringing pd policies into line with Federal ..... marble falls Sep 2014 #26
If you're asked to get out, you have an option. If you're told, no option George II Sep 2014 #47
Is everyone in Ferguson's administration so totally tone-deaf? So much for the chief's 'apology'.... marble falls Sep 2014 #4
I think I prefer just cutting off all of Missouri's highway money until he is indicted bluestateguy Sep 2014 #6
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #20
Is Wilson or his chief applying for FEMA money? merrily Sep 2014 #31
Sure - because making a point of refusing to help whopis01 Sep 2014 #71
So basically they're doubling down on the fascist thug mindset Populist_Prole Sep 2014 #7
Yes. You are correct. And until the citizens across the state rise up in anger and against this, kelliekat44 Sep 2014 #8
Or maybe, just maybe.... Populist_Prole Sep 2014 #9
Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #18
Pretty much this. hifiguy Sep 2014 #21
And their 1% overlords. nt tblue37 Sep 2014 #23
Post removed Post removed Sep 2014 #65
In ways that truly matter, St. Louis is the most segregated, polarized city in the U.S. . ColesCountyDem Sep 2014 #10
What are the nationalities of most of people in St. Louis? Just curious. jwirr Sep 2014 #13
An educated guess: ColesCountyDem Sep 2014 #16
Latests data from http://www.city-data.com shows it as cstanleytech Sep 2014 #54
I'd agree with those numbers. ColesCountyDem Sep 2014 #55
Perhaps among the most, but Boston is pretty high on that list, too George II Sep 2014 #48
This is pretty much them saying "fuck you" to most of Ferguson. Chakab Sep 2014 #11
Message auto-removed Name removed Sep 2014 #19
Or as soon as it came to his attention, before public awareness applied pressure. nt tblue37 Sep 2014 #25
What a flock of assholes! That police department needs to be disbanded. That is WAY wrong. C Moon Sep 2014 #12
Homeland Security? merrily Sep 2014 #32
You all have it wrong! dickthegrouch Sep 2014 #14
However, a T-shirt would be ok cosmicone Sep 2014 #15
I wish I was surprised by this mimi85 Sep 2014 #22
this has nothing to do with the 1st amendment noiretextatique Sep 2014 #24
If the rule is "No bracelets on duty" then it's one thing. But "No bracelets on duty when the 24601 Sep 2014 #36
they are advocating a position in an on-going investigation noiretextatique Sep 2014 #37
I agree, do we want to DOJ under the next republican administration KinMd Sep 2014 #50
would you have the same response if they wore hoods? noiretextatique Sep 2014 #51
It's not equivalent. A bracelet making a statement in support or not supporting a position neither 24601 Sep 2014 #69
Police officers on duty do not share the same slate of first amendment rights LTX Sep 2014 #72
You're responding to the wrong post. My position is that the dapartment can prohibit the wearing 24601 Sep 2014 #81
You're missing the point. LTX Sep 2014 #82
Police officers do not have 1st Amendment rights Feral Child Sep 2014 #78
Can't they substitute rock Sep 2014 #27
They could change the message to... Kalidurga Sep 2014 #34
no kidding... Locrian Sep 2014 #39
Hey! There's a fire over there! Let's pour some gasoline on it! EEO Sep 2014 #35
exactly...totally inappropriate noiretextatique Sep 2014 #38
K&R...Thanks for posting red dog 1 Sep 2014 #42
the DOJ needs to shut the entire force down.. frylock Sep 2014 #45
They could make little ones to put around their peckers. candelista Sep 2014 #46
Like in other corrupt municipalities The Wizard Sep 2014 #49
apparently, the police chief agreed to the ban noiretextatique Sep 2014 #52
The cops will just get covert with it Doug.Goodall Sep 2014 #53
If they are Darren Wilson SwankyXomb Sep 2014 #58
Darren Wilson is not someone they want to advertise as being... from all I've seen he's a cop Cha Sep 2014 #62
The police should be fired. Sunlei Sep 2014 #67
The DOJ took the right action here Gothmog Sep 2014 #68
Could be seen as intimidation and harassment TomCADem Sep 2014 #73

Response to 3rdwaydem (Reply #1)

Cha

(295,911 posts)
59. Sounds like an idiot, bravenak. I'm just going by your response 'cause
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 07:04 PM
Sep 2014

it's "name removed" now.

 

bravenak

(34,648 posts)
60. Name Removed - The Idiot.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 07:08 PM
Sep 2014

I lol'd because it was such an obvious troll. Some cave man crawled out of his hole to say stupid shit. I love this place.

Cha

(295,911 posts)
61. I hear ya.. Ferguson, MOPD will wear these stupid arm bracelets but they won't wear their name
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 07:16 PM
Sep 2014

tags.

"In a separate letter sent to Jackson earlier this week, the Justice Department said its investigators had observed Ferguson police officers not wearing, or obscuring, their name tags on their uniforms, a violation of the police department's rules."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5590188

brave~

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
2. Once again, this is why cops have a bad reputation
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:44 PM
Sep 2014

The good ones close ranks to protect the corrupt and brutal among them and as a result, their public image is that all cops are corrupt and brutal.

You would think they wouldn't have to be told to stop wearing those stupid bracelets or at least that their chief would be smart enough to see the potential long term damage from these images.

I know I'll catch a ration of shit for saying this but police unions are a huge part of this problem and that's why I don't share the same sympathies toward public unions that a lot of Democrats have.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
29. You're conflating issues or using this to justify an animosity.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:32 PM
Sep 2014

The police officers' union closing ranks behind someone who shot and killed an unarmed teen does not have a parallel in the teaching field or the city or state social work field or the public building maintenance field.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
40. Au contraire mon frère
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:49 PM
Sep 2014

I was a public employee for over 35 years (although not a union member for most of it) and I had ample opportunity to see examples of public unions circling the wagons to protect incompetent or even criminal actions by their members. Granted most of these cases did not involve consequences as serious as the Mike Brown case, although I recall one case where a building inspector, either lazy or on the take, overlooked some faulty wiring in a farm workers housing project and a little boy was killed in a fire that was caused by the defective work and was reinstated because of pressure bright to bear by his union. I've seen cases in public safety, public works, park and building maintenance, even clerical workers in the welfare and public health departments where unions refused to cooperate in getting rid of bad employees.

You mentioned teachers. If anything, teachers unions are worse than police when it comes to protecting the . My wife was employed for some years as an administrative employee with the local school district. Actually she was the secretary to the superintendent, and as such an exempt or non union employee. By her own estimate, she has sat through one hundred or more termination hearings for teachers, including some where mistreatment and even molestation were alleged to have taken place, and she says she saw many cases where other teachers or the union itself, would refuse to testify against their peers. I've heard the same from teachers who were pissed off that the profession was being wrongly accused of being full of malcontents or incompetents yet felt powerless to defend themselves because the unions were so powerful.

You can accuse me of a bias if you want but if so, it is a bias that comes from many years of observing the workings of governmental organizations and the unions that have become so powerful over the past half century.

And it's not just public employees. Or unions. No profession does an adequate job of self policing. Doctors, lawyers, accountants, architects, you name it, they all seem to think "there but for the grace of god go I" when confronted with misdeeds by one of their peers.

merrily

(45,251 posts)
41. So, you were hiding an animosity and conflating issues.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:54 PM
Sep 2014

You right. I was mistaken. You were not doing one or the other. You were doing both.

BTW: unions vs. professions who don't police themselves--also conflating different issues.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
43. I'm not hiding anything particularly "an animosity"
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 04:33 PM
Sep 2014

I'm telling you the way it actually works.

If you don't want to believe it, that's your problem.

Now have a nice day, OK?

merrily

(45,251 posts)
44. Your reply #2 did use the OP to justify an animosity, as my reply 29
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 04:44 PM
Sep 2014

stated. Your reply 40 speaks for itself on that point.




kwassa

(23,340 posts)
63. Don't extrapolate nationally from your single local experience.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 07:47 PM
Sep 2014

Your experience is specific to your area. Unions can vary tremendously, as do their contracts, as do superintendents, as do school systems.

Unionism has been a big downward trend in this country for a long time; you don't seem aware of it. They are less powerful, not more powerful, than in the past.

Also, the states with the highest educational test scores are states with strong teachers unions.

Unions are not all-powerful, much power lies with management, regardless of the industry. The unions exist to resist the abuse of management, which happens everywhere.

tularetom

(23,664 posts)
64. Public unions are not less powerful
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 09:21 PM
Sep 2014

Fifty years ago, public employee unions were virtually nonexistent in California.

In 1968, Ronnie Reagan signed the Meyers-Milias-Brown Act, establishing collective bargaining for California's municipal and county employees. Since then membership in public sector unions in the state has grown to 2.4 million. Traditionally, salary in the public sector lagged behind private employees but the benefits, such as liberal vacation and sick leave policies and a generous pension system, compensated for the disparity in pay. Since then, public sector salaries have come to exceed those for similar jobs in private industry, and the benefits have grown even more attractive. For instance, it's not uncommon for long term public employees in California to retire at a higher level of pay than they earned while on the job. I myself currently receive 84% of what my salary was when I retired in 2000, plus my employer picks up the cost of my medicare supplement and my wife's (another $6k per year). That's all very generous, and I'm happy to be getting it, but it simply is not sustainable in areas of the state where unemployment exceeds 15%.

But 2.4 million employees is a big voting bloc, and they do vote.

demigoddess

(6,640 posts)
70. the problem in those instances
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 12:17 PM
Sep 2014

seem to be the custom of allowing organizations to police their own. The NFL (Ray Rise case an example) Organizations like teachers should have an outside group looking at charges. Molestation etc, Michael Brown's killing should not be investigated by the union or the fellow employees. I would think we can find something better.

Bryce Butler

(338 posts)
30. You won't catch any sh!t from me...
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:34 PM
Sep 2014
"I know I'll catch a ration of shit for saying this but police unions are a huge part of this problem and that's why I don't share the same sympathies toward public unions that a lot of Democrats have."

ncjustice80

(948 posts)
66. Just police unions.
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 08:13 AM
Sep 2014

They are all corrupt like their members. Police should not have unions and should have extensive DOJ oversight!

rpannier

(24,304 posts)
74. That's the argument the right wing uses against teacher's unions
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 10:59 PM
Sep 2014

Hate to break it to you, but it's all public employees or none.
That's where the game is at.

Besides, if you're so upset at police and their unions, maybe you should refocus your anger at the public.
District Attorney offices have brought hundreds of indictments to trial over the past 10+ years and they seldom get a conviction
Face fact, the public, for the most part, won't convict the police even when there is ample video and eye witness testimony

ncjustice80

(948 posts)
75. You sound like another police apologist friend.
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 06:41 AM
Sep 2014

Cops get crazy pensions, can drive how they want, and kill brown people at will. Tell me again why these lapdogs of the 1% deserve a union?

rpannier

(24,304 posts)
77. Not an apologist
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 09:02 AM
Sep 2014

Reality
The public will NOT convict in the vast majority of cases
They deserve the protection of unions the same as all public employees do
Once one goes down, so do the rest.

Curious... your solution would be what exactly?
Because they get the same state and federal protections as everyone else in America
So if they're charged and found not guilty, are you arguing they should still lose their jobs?
Guilty no matter what?

You can choose to throw out caustic terms like 'apologist' all you want, but it doesn't change anything

Oh... and I am not your friend. I do not know you.

ncjustice80

(948 posts)
79. I actually have a comprehensive plan, friend.
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 01:42 PM
Sep 2014

1. Federal law/constitutional amendment that specifically prohibits law enforcement from having collective bargaining (similar to the military).

2. All officers must have body and dash cameras. Failure to do so may result in federal prosecution.

3. Civilian police may not carry the following items as part of routine patrol- firearms, body armor, tazers, or batons.

4. Should an emergency requiring weapons break out such as a school shooting, the chief of police must authorize the weapons being released from the police armory. Following the incident, the DOJ will investigate the incident and file charges against the officers involved as appropriate.

NickB79

(19,113 posts)
80. "Civilian police may not carry the following items as part of routine patrol- firearms, body armor"
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 03:41 PM
Sep 2014




Frankly, your "comprehensive" plan is anything but.
 

Oktober

(1,488 posts)
83. When seconds count the police and their means to protect...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 06:53 AM
Sep 2014

Are going to be hours away instead of the usual minutes.

I'm sure that battered wife being held at knife or gunpoint will appreciate the time you feel is necessary to fill out the paperwork to draw a baton.


ncjustice80

(948 posts)
84. They have pepper spray and physical training. Spray the guy and take the knife away.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 07:00 AM
Sep 2014

If it is a hostage situation (which is incredibly rare) they can lock down the area till an armed reaponse arrives. Lets be realistic- the VAST majority of police shootings are unjust murders. Only a tiny number of incidents need guns.

 

Oktober

(1,488 posts)
85. So just to be clear...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 07:31 AM
Sep 2014

... you would pepper spray a man with a knife to someone's neck?

You obviously can't get past your obvious bias against cops to have a rational discussion.

I do find it extremely convenient that in your scenario, someone else is going to have to pay the price for your little plan. I'm sure it's worth a few lives, both civilian and LE, to make you feel better right?

ncjustice80

(948 posts)
86. The police in the UK do a far better job and don t need guns.
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 09:24 AM
Sep 2014

Or do you support police brutality? Because that is what this is about.

 

Oktober

(1,488 posts)
87. I support intelligent discourse and rational thought...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 10:59 AM
Sep 2014

Removing all tools of force from police is just as stupid as giving them each an individual tank.

As for police in the UK they still have access to a wide variety of tools and levels of force without the added wrinkle of living in a culture where access to firearms is a fundamental right.

You just seem to want to turn them into your personal whipping boy because of your personal dislike for them.

Also, you haven't addressed how your plan only seems to come at a cost to others. How super duper convenient...

 

Oktober

(1,488 posts)
89. If that's how you live in NC, I suggest you find somewhere else...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 04:04 PM
Sep 2014

No one in my section seems to have a problem.

If you are in that much fear and can't run the statistics then maybe a visit to the therapist would help?

 

Oktober

(1,488 posts)
91. I do.. Regularly...
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 07:52 PM
Sep 2014

Is this the part where you tell me that all that WRAL has is scary bad news and scary stories so that must reflect society?

rpannier

(24,304 posts)
56. I know I'll catch a ration of shit... I don't share the same sympathies toward public unions
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 06:54 PM
Sep 2014

As well you should
Selective support of unions is part of the reason why our economy is in such bad shape
Public employees, which have stronger unions, make good money and help move the economy
Private employees are small in union numbers and so, private employees get screwed

George II

(67,782 posts)
3. The writer of the article contradicts herself in the headline and the first sentence....
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:45 PM
Sep 2014

...the headline says "TELLS", the article says "ASKS". Big difference, and obviously the headline was written to get more attention.

marble falls

(56,358 posts)
5. Difference without distinction. Whats the difference between a Cop asking to get out of my car ....
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:51 PM
Sep 2014

and telling me to get out of my car?

Did the Cops stop wearing the bracelet? Asking is the first step in a process that brings about a stated goal.

1. Ask
2. Tell
3. Order

 

RiverNoord

(1,150 posts)
17. The distinction is huge.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:50 PM
Sep 2014

I saw the 'tell' in the title and was mystified. The US DOJ doesn't govern state/city/county law enforcement procedures. They would have no authority to tell the cops to remove the bracelets and couldn't legally enforce any such demand.

That's the distinction.

marble falls

(56,358 posts)
26. The biggest distintion is there is a process of bringing pd policies into line with Federal .....
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:25 PM
Sep 2014

regulation through the Department of Justice. There are auditors located all around in every Federal District.
And cops may or may not may not follow procedure that may or may not be Constitutional. The difference is basically that cops won't get shot by the DOJ. But you or I might well get shot by a cop.

So the Fed has a lot of might to bring to bear. A suggestion is a good as a District Court order after a trial prosecuted by the district US State Attorney (this is where guys like "America's Mayor", MR 911 himself, Giuliani got his start) after an investigation by the FBI or the Civil Rights Enforcement div of the DoJ itself, 90% of the time.

Most people pay attention to a DoJ suggestion.

marble falls

(56,358 posts)
4. Is everyone in Ferguson's administration so totally tone-deaf? So much for the chief's 'apology'....
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:46 PM
Sep 2014

it shouldn't have to fallen on the DoJ to point it out. Where was the chief?

bluestateguy

(44,173 posts)
6. I think I prefer just cutting off all of Missouri's highway money until he is indicted
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:52 PM
Sep 2014

and no FEMA money for Missouri if there are tornadoes or floods.

You want your FEMA money? You want your highway money? Then indict Darren Wilson.

Show me, Missouri.

Response to bluestateguy (Reply #6)

merrily

(45,251 posts)
31. Is Wilson or his chief applying for FEMA money?
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:35 PM
Sep 2014

Who do you think would be most hurt by your suggestion?

whopis01

(3,467 posts)
71. Sure - because making a point of refusing to help
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 12:18 PM
Sep 2014

someone who is trying to survive after just having lost their house to a tornado is a great way to make a point.

"It's a shame you lost your house, but there are some real asshole cops over in Ferguson. Why don't you complain to your governor and get something done about that. Then we can talk about getting you some aid."

That sounds like a wonderfully moral, ethical, and compassionate approach.

Populist_Prole

(5,364 posts)
7. So basically they're doubling down on the fascist thug mindset
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:53 PM
Sep 2014

They still believe they are an army of soldiers occupying a hostile locality. Great for long term relations with the community......................

 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
8. Yes. You are correct. And until the citizens across the state rise up in anger and against this,
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 12:57 PM
Sep 2014

they are hastening the day that this nation becomes utterly fascist and even more lawless.

Populist_Prole

(5,364 posts)
9. Or maybe, just maybe....
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:08 PM
Sep 2014

And bear with me on this, it's a case of "the best defense is a good offense". What I mean by that is that they know he screwed up but they are unwilling to throw him under the bus and are thus using that campaign an attempt to blunt the prosecution's opposition, one that will likely bring the hammer and tongs on the whole force.

Still a weaselish behavior though.

Response to Populist_Prole (Reply #7)

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
21. Pretty much this.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:02 PM
Sep 2014

But the only people cops are there to protect and serve are themselves. Assholes.

Response to Populist_Prole (Reply #7)

ColesCountyDem

(6,943 posts)
10. In ways that truly matter, St. Louis is the most segregated, polarized city in the U.S. .
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:08 PM
Sep 2014

I currently live and grew up about 80 miles southeast of St. Louis, so it has always been the city I've known the best. I've also traveled to most cities of any decent size in the lower 48, and I have yet to find one that is as segregated as is St. Louis. As bad as it looks from media reports, etc., it's truly one of those "you have to see it for yourself" places, to truly understand how bad it is now. I won't even go in to how much worse it used to be.

ColesCountyDem

(6,943 posts)
16. An educated guess:
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:37 PM
Sep 2014

St. Louis city is about 45% Caucasian (German, Italian, English and Slavic), 50% Black and 5% Latino and Asian. St. Louis County, where Ferguson is, is probably 70% white, 25% Black and 5% Latino and Asian. Both the city and the county are poster children for 'white flight'.

cstanleytech

(26,080 posts)
54. Latests data from http://www.city-data.com shows it as
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 06:30 PM
Sep 2014

Black alone - 151,755 (47.7%)
White alone - 135,953 (42.7%)
Hispanic - 11,598 (3.6%)
Asian alone - 9,220 (2.9%)
Two or more races - 8,032 (2.5%)
American Indian alone - 871 (0.3%)
Other race alone - 743 (0.2%)

 

Chakab

(1,727 posts)
11. This is pretty much them saying "fuck you" to most of Ferguson.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:14 PM
Sep 2014

If the chief was serious about that apology, he would have addressed this issue as soon as it was publicized.

Response to Chakab (Reply #11)

C Moon

(12,188 posts)
12. What a flock of assholes! That police department needs to be disbanded. That is WAY wrong.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:20 PM
Sep 2014

and of course, the officer is wearing military fatigue green—whatever happened to police blue?

dickthegrouch

(3,151 posts)
14. You all have it wrong!
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:26 PM
Sep 2014

They are so much in solidarity with the murdering thug Wilson, that they want to go to jail with him.
"I am Darren Wilson" clarifies their desire to be held guilty along with him.






I hope!

 

cosmicone

(11,014 posts)
15. However, a T-shirt would be ok
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 01:32 PM
Sep 2014

if it said, "I am going to kill myself by indulging in jelly donuts so sue me."

mimi85

(1,805 posts)
22. I wish I was surprised by this
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:11 PM
Sep 2014

but not much is a surprise anymore.

I posted this at the end of a thread yesterday, which no doubt got lost in the shuffle. No big deal.

It's beyond ridiculous. I guess the 1st amendment is only applied to those who toe the line. It totally sucks!

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
24. this has nothing to do with the 1st amendment
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 02:22 PM
Sep 2014

it has everything to do with behaving appropriately while on duty. i could care less if they wear those bracelets while off duty.

24601

(3,940 posts)
36. If the rule is "No bracelets on duty" then it's one thing. But "No bracelets on duty when the
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:07 PM
Sep 2014

government disagrees with the content" is very much a 1st amendment issue.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
37. they are advocating a position in an on-going investigation
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:20 PM
Sep 2014

Last edited Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:53 PM - Edit history (1)

i cannot see how anyone thinks that's ok. would an "i shooot black people in the back while they have their hands up" bracelet be free speech? no, it would inappropriate while on duty, just as this bracelet is.

KinMd

(966 posts)
50. I agree, do we want to DOJ under the next republican administration
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 05:38 PM
Sep 2014

telling local agencies what to wear. If the Chief tells them not to wear the bracelets or it's against the uniform regs then I get it

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
51. would you have the same response if they wore hoods?
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 06:04 PM
Sep 2014

i am wilson = i shoot black people in the back with their hands up. it is totally inappropriate, even for ferguson.

24601

(3,940 posts)
69. It's not equivalent. A bracelet making a statement in support or not supporting a position neither
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 10:14 AM
Sep 2014

masks the identity of the wearer nor affects performance by restricting field of view.

But take it half-way. Would you support officers wearing a hoodie? Will you uphold the support of T. Martin or hold that hoodies are inappropriate in uniform & on duty.

My position is that the message is not the issue. Instead, it's whether officers should be sending ANY message in uniform & on duty.

If the department allows bracelets, going another step and regulating content does push this into a 1st Amendment.

Change the message slightly and presume some officers wear a bracelet that says, "God is my Partner", while others wear ones that say, "There is no God."

The proper departmental response is to determine that bracelets have no place in uniform, and not try to say bracelets with which we disagree have no place in uniform.

LTX

(1,020 posts)
72. Police officers on duty do not share the same slate of first amendment rights
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 12:29 PM
Sep 2014

as non-governmental civilians. This has long been the case.

The determination of what speech is protected in the public employment context involves a two-part analysis. First, the speech must address a “matter of public concern,” and then the “interest of the employee in speaking must be weighed against the interest of the State, as an employer in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” In other words, if the speech addresses a personal matter, it’s not protected by the First Amendment. If it’s a public matter, the court must balance the employee’s interest in expression against the government’s interest in effectively discharging its duties.

Courts will inquire as to “the point of the speech in question: Was it the employee’s point to bring wrongdoing to light? Or to raise other issues of public concern because they are of public concern? Or was the point to further some purely private interest?” However, just because a police officer speaks out on a topic that may be deemed one of public concern does not automatically render their speech protected. The content and form of the speech, along with the surrounding circumstances, including the officer’s reasons for their remarks, are important factors in determining whether the officer’s speech is a matter of public concern.

In the case at hand, it would have to determined whether the bracelets are a form of personal speech, or speech addressing a public concern. I find it difficult to formulate any argument rendering the bracelets a form of speech addressing a public concern. Hence, I can only conclude at present that the bracelets are not protected speech, and police officers can be prevented from wearing them, whether by federal or local edict.

24601

(3,940 posts)
81. You're responding to the wrong post. My position is that the dapartment can prohibit the wearing
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 05:56 PM
Sep 2014

of bracelets.

But if they allow officers to wear them, then the department loses when it comes to regulating the content.

And the federal government has no more power to prescribe state and local bracelet regulations than it has determining whether sheriffs must wear green or brown uniforms.

Likewise that state & local officials have no say in federal uniforms and/or accessory items.

LTX

(1,020 posts)
82. You're missing the point.
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 07:21 PM
Sep 2014

The "content" of the bracelets is precisely the issue. If that "content" is a personal expression, first amendment jurisprudence has long held that it can be prohibited in the case of public employees, such as police officers. You need to bring that "content" within the the ambit of public concern, which I cannot (at present, absent some compelling argument to the contrary) see any argument for. The "bracelet" issue that you raise is simply a red herring.

Feral Child

(2,086 posts)
78. Police officers do not have 1st Amendment rights
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 09:08 AM
Sep 2014

whilst on duty.

They are not allowed to make overt religious or politically partisan statements, either by verbal or symbolic presentation.

I'm not saying they are compelled to observe that requirement in every instance or in every locale, I'm just saying the regulations are there and have been supported by adjudication.


These insanely provocative bracelets are a prime example why the regs are in place.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
38. exactly...totally inappropriate
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 03:21 PM
Sep 2014

the chief's apology means very little if he doesn't put and end to this bracelet nonsense.

 

candelista

(1,986 posts)
46. They could make little ones to put around their peckers.
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 04:54 PM
Sep 2014

That way they could remind themselves of who they are without offending anyone else.

The Wizard

(12,482 posts)
49. Like in other corrupt municipalities
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 05:07 PM
Sep 2014

He'll get indicted and the prosecution will deliberately present a weak case so he's found not guilty. Remember Rodney King was beaten to a pulp while lying defenseless on the ground and there was a video. The police were all acquitted in State Court.

Doug.Goodall

(1,241 posts)
53. The cops will just get covert with it
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 06:09 PM
Sep 2014

They will have the secret fist bump and code words like "Ductile Wire". Then only the 'cool' cops will be allowed in the covert club; the ones who 'really know' what the score is.

SwankyXomb

(2,030 posts)
58. If they are Darren Wilson
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 06:58 PM
Sep 2014

shouldn't they be on paid administrative leave and not menacing the people of Ferguson?

Cha

(295,911 posts)
62. Darren Wilson is not someone they want to advertise as being... from all I've seen he's a cop
Sat Sep 27, 2014, 07:29 PM
Sep 2014

who hopefully doesn't get away with murder like George Zimmerman did when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

The Ferguson MOPD will wear their DW bracelets but they won't wear their gd name tags.. which is against their own rules.. it screams that they don't give a shit about the law or people.. only their vicious power to kill.

"A letter sent to Ferguson police from the DOJ earlier this week also said investigators had noticed some officers either not wearing or obscuring the name tags on their uniform in violation of the police department's own rules, according to Reuters."

Mahalo, DonV

TomCADem

(17,378 posts)
73. Could be seen as intimidation and harassment
Sun Sep 28, 2014, 09:41 PM
Sep 2014

If you are a person of color, and are stopped by a cop wearing this bracelet, is the message, "you could be next?"

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»DOJ Tells Ferguson Cops T...