4 Cops abandon security posts at basketball pregame when players come out wearing BLM t-shirts - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Zephyrs;50698414]Welcome to at will employment. They could have been fired because someone didn't like the way they tied their shoes, yet as soon as they exercise their right to work when and where they see fit, you get your knickers in a knot. I wouldn't want to work in a potentially hostile environment like that either. They had the financial security to say, fuck you, and walk out. They did. End of discussion.[/QUOTE] And at-will employment is fucking terrible. If I hire security I don't want them leaving because someone wore a shirt they found offensive. Unbelievably immature.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;50698420]How?[/QUOTE] They left, as is their right. They prevented themselves from being signed up to work there again. They have no legal obligation to continue employment. They did not threaten. They did not harass. They simply walked out, and quit. That is exactly what they should have done the moment they decided they didn't want to work there. If they decided they were OK with continuing to work there, they could have stayed, but they were not required to be OK with it, let alone continue working their regardless of how they felt about it.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50698470]Does the NRA openly advocate for the murder of police officers? Does the NRA throw molotovs and bricks at police officers? Does the NRA label the police automatically guilty before any facts come out?[/QUOTE] Nope - but neither does BLM. It's like saying that bank security should feel free to leave their jobs because someone wearing a shirt that said "#OccupyWallStreet" walked into their bank. Oh no, some of them are anarchistic terrorists who want to blow up Chase bank! I don't feel safe as security, so I'm abandoning my job and my contract with my employer because this man's shirt offends me!

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50698470]Does the NRA openly advocate for the murder of police officers? Does the NRA throw molotovs and bricks at police officers? Does the NRA label the police automatically guilty before any facts come out?[/QUOTE] No but it's okay because as a leaderless hashtag movement, they have zero accountability which absolves them of all responsibility. /s

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50698467]They volunteered to do security at a venue, only for the team to come out as anti-police, and less than a week after the murder of 5 police officers by a cop hater. I don't blame them for wanting to leave, I would feel very unwanted there, and that display is not what I thought I had volunteered for.[/QUOTE] "Anti-police" in the same way that people who are frustrated with Congress are "anti-government."

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698472]And at-will employment is fucking terrible. If I hire security I don't want them leaving because someone wore a shirt they found offensive. Unbelievably immature.[/QUOTE] Hiring private security vs asking cops to work OT are two different things

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50698483]No but it's okay because as a leaderless hashtag movement, they have zero accountability which absolves them of all responsibility. /s[/QUOTE] The official BLM website organization openly denounced the Dallas shooting and all violence against police on all their social media sites. Is that not good enough for you? Does everyone who's ever used the hashtag need to agree that violence is unacceptable to satisfy you?

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698482]Nope - but neither does BLM.[/QUOTE] lmao you are a riot man So BLM didn't run with the narrative that Brown was a good boy that never did any wrong and he was on his hands and knees begging for his life while the racist man executed him? And they continue to run with that fantasy despite the facts? BLM doesn't march screaming "Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon?" you sure bout that

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50698508]lmao you are a riot man So BLM didn't run with the narrative that Brown was a good boy that never did any wrong and he was on his hands and knees begging for his life while the racist man executed him? And they continue to run with that fantasy despite the facts? BLM doesn't march screaming "Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon?" you sure bout that[/QUOTE] That's not Black Lives Matter :downs:

[QUOTE=-nesto-;50698508]lmao you are a riot man So BLM didn't run with the narrative that Brown was a good boy that never did any wrong and he was on his hands and knees begging for his life while the racist man executed him? And they continue to run with that fantasy despite the facts? BLM doesn't march screaming "Pigs in a blanket, fry em like bacon?" you sure bout that[/QUOTE] Has an NRA member ever used a racial slur? Guess it's a racist organization hate group. Overall, outside of the echo chamber where only negative news on BLM is reported, it's largely positive. Are those chants acceptable? No - but pretending that it's a majority is unreasonable and based on a skewed sample. Those are reasonable critiques - but abandoning your post because someone wears a shirt you dislike isn't reasonable.

I can understand why, It's not like a BLM protest occurred only 2 days ago which resulted in 20+cops hurt from thrown Molotov's, rebar and bricks.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698495]The official BLM website organization openly denounced the Dallas shooting and all violence against police on all their social media sites. Is that not good enough for you? Does everyone who's ever used the hashtag need to agree that violence is unacceptable to satisfy you?[/QUOTE] BLM does something bad/negative = It's a hashtag movement that can't be blamed for some actions of its members since it doesn't have a typical group organization structure. But when people feel justifiably uncomfortable to work a event for them = They are just being silly, because apparently now the "official" website has truly represented the movement, and put to rest that growing population of people that actually talk on social media in favor for violence towards cops. BLM is a horribly ran movement and only causes more racism.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698482]It's like saying that bank security should feel free to leave their jobs because someone wearing a shirt that said "#OccupyWallStreet" walked into their bank.[/QUOTE] No it's not, bank security are hired to protect the bank, which is a job you will do part or full time. The security do not have to worry about the bank showing contempt for them because that doesn't make sense in this context. It's not really comparable. These officers volunteered to attend an event without knowing that the venue was going to be showing anti-police sentiments. Maybe the venue should have warned would-be volunteers that they will not feel welcome. [QUOTE=.Isak.;50698487]"Anti-police" in the same way that people who are frustrated with Congress are "anti-government."[/QUOTE][QUOTE=.Isak.;50698495]The official BLM website organization openly denounced the Dallas shooting and all violence against police on all their social media sites. Is that not good enough for you? Does everyone who's ever used the hashtag need to agree that violence is unacceptable to satisfy you?[/QUOTE] You can denounce the murder of police officers and still be anti-police. And while the leader denounced the murders, there was no shortage of people praising them, both in and out of the movement. There's still a very prevalent anti-police sentiment in the movement whether they condone the murders or not.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698540]Has an NRA member ever used a racial slur? Guess it's a racist organization hate group.[/QUOTE] Has an NRA leader ever tried to disarm a police officer at an anticop rally? [URL="http://abc7chicago.com/news/chicago-man-arrested-at-black-lives-matter-protest-charged/1422295/"]Oh wait, BLM beat em to it[/URL] Fuck outta here with your hypothetical nonsense

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;50698467]They volunteered to do security at a venue, only for the team to come out as anti-police, and less than a week after the murder of 5 police officers by a cop hater. I don't blame them for wanting to leave, I would feel very unwanted there, and that display is not what I thought I had volunteered for.[/QUOTE] how are they anti police?

I think BLM has too many bad apples for the "good part" to outweigh it. You don't need an affiliation such as Black Lives Matter to push an agenda regarding the fair treatment of of minorities in the United States. This label has now evolve to the point where people no longer see it as something good, and to the point where people are [I]scared[/I] of its representatives. Whether or not the four policemen did the "right" or "wrong" thing is ultimately irrelevant. The fact this was the decision they went for, the fact it was even [I]considered[/I] for law enforcement to walk out as a response to a shirt means that the label has grown into something a lot of people would see as undesirable. Also if you're willing to become part of a group and labelize yourself you need to be ready to accept the fact you'll be put in the same basket as the bad apples. That's why you need to do your best to weed out the worse representatives of a group if you're going to be very vocal. This is something that BLM has [I]not[/I] managed to accomplish.

I think these players were wearing Black lives matter t-shirts as a statement about the current situation of lots of black guys getting shot by rogue cops moreso than a statement of intent that they hate cops and would like to see them shot.

[QUOTE=karlosfandango;50698823]I think these players were wearing Black lives matter t-shirts as a statement about the current situation of lots of black guys getting shot by rogue cops moreso than a statement of intent that they hate cops and would like to see them shot.[/QUOTE] If they associate themselves with a group they should expect to represent [I]all[/I] the things that group stands for, not just cherry pick whatever they want while not specifying the meaning of their affiliation.

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;50698729]how are they anti police?[/QUOTE] So endorsing a movement that has enormous anti cop resentment, has attacked police numerous times, and throws shitfits over made up statistics, can't possibly be seen as being anti-cop? Would you feel the same about someone saying, "I don't have a problem with black people, but I support the KKK"?

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;50698836]If they associate themselves with a group they should expect to represent [I]all[/I] the things that group stands for, not just cherry pick whatever they want while not specifying the meaning of their affiliation.[/QUOTE] From the little I know about this group, they are a movement that campaigns against violence toward black people, they are not like a black power group are they? From where I am in the UK it certainly comes across that they have a point. There do seem to be a dis proportionate amount of black guys shot by the police. I'm assuming also that these basketball players were also black?

[QUOTE=SIRIUS;50698729]how are they anti police?[/QUOTE] The latest example I could think of is [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/pride-parade-toronto-1.3662823]their "no cop representation on gay parade" stunt[/url], which is incredibly dismissive of the plight of homosexual members of the police force, just because they are of the police force.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698540]Has an NRA member ever used a racial slur? Guess it's a racist organization hate group. Overall, outside of the echo chamber where only negative news on BLM is reported, it's largely positive. Are those chants acceptable? No - but pretending that it's a majority is unreasonable and based on a skewed sample. Those are reasonable critiques - but abandoning your post because someone wears a shirt you dislike isn't reasonable.[/QUOTE] Does BLM as a whole actually promote keeping an open mind concerning the justifiability of the incidents they protest? So far from what I've seen the cops were always automatically assumed to be in the wrong, and no matter how justified lethal force may be, it's always an outrage. I mean you've got a guy who's a violent sex offender, got the cops called on because of a firearm he wasn't legally allowed to possess, refused to cooperate, violently resisted arrest, got tazed first, all that while keeping his illegally-owned weapon concealed and then reaching for it while the officers were trying to pin him down. But then when he gets shot for being a lethal threat BLM is outraged and organises a protest against it? At this point this movement seems incapable of constructive thinking. They just see a black man get shot by police and automatically assume it was unjustified or even racially motivated. I do understand the policemen reactions when faced with people who so easily take sides against them without really questioning the validity of their stance.

[QUOTE=.Isak.;50698495]The official BLM website organization openly denounced the Dallas shooting and all violence against police on all their social media sites. Is that not good enough for you? Does everyone who's ever used the hashtag need to agree that violence is unacceptable to satisfy you?[/QUOTE] Ah yes, the same Black Lives Matter that says "to assign the actions of one person to an entire movement is dangerous and irresponsible," while simultaneously denouncing the police based on the actions of a handful of officers (and doing so before any factual evidence surfaces, to boot!)

[QUOTE=karlosfandango;50698942]From the little I know about this group, they are a movement that campaigns against violence toward black people, they are not like a black power group are they? From where I am in the UK it certainly comes across that they have a point. There do seem to be a dis proportionate amount of black guys shot by the police. I'm assuming also that these basketball players were also black?[/QUOTE] They pursue very aggressive promotion tactics and have a reputation of attention-whoring due to their untimely appearances in unrelated events. There's also a lot of bad shit going on around BLM with some of its supporters also advocating violence against police forces, generally carrying an anti-police sentiment. Not to mention the Dallas Shooting.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;50696289]That really doesn't change anything at all. Also, while not always, its not uncommon for off-duty cops to still wear their uniforms when doing security. Some jurisdictions prohibit officers from wearing uniforms while off-duty, others allow it, and I couldn't find mention either way in the full article if they were. But even if they weren't, that doesn't make one feel safe. They withdrew themselves from future consideration as security. They didn't just leave the game, they quit outright after this.[/QUOTE] That's well and good, but they should have done so AFTER the practice/game. Allowing personal feelings to compromise your job is literally the problem we face, and all they did was just that. Not a good precedent.

[QUOTE=27X;50699077]That's well and good, but they should have done so AFTER the practice/game. Allowing personal feelings to compromise your job is literally the problem we face, and all they did was just that. Not a good precedent.[/QUOTE] Hardly, they're not obligated to be there. It was volunteer.

They were expected to be there and stay. Again, doing the very thing people have an issue with at the core of the problem is not going to help your case, quite the opposite, and nothing prevented them from staying til the end and then giving their reasons for not coming back any more.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;50698836]If they associate themselves with a group they should expect to represent [I]all[/I] the things that group stands for, not just cherry pick whatever they want while not specifying the meaning of their affiliation.[/QUOTE] This is the same logic people use to paint all cops as bad. If five cops brutalize and abuse someone, and they get cleared by the in-house investigation, then all other cops are guilty. It's backwards thinking. If you say "I support BLM," and then someone assumes you want to kill all cops, it's conflating a minority view with a majority one. If you say "I am a cop," and then someone assumes you want to brutalize and kill black people, they're doing the exact same thing. Neither are fair. Don't do that.

[QUOTE=27X;50699140]They were expected to be there and stay. Again, doing the very thing people have an issue with at the core of the problem is not going to help your case, quite the opposite, and nothing prevented them from staying til the end and then giving their reasons for not coming back any more.[/QUOTE]The core of the problem is the police not providing after-work security for basketball games?

The core of the problem is that "protect and serve" does not mean "I protect and therefore you serve". Whether something offends you or not should have no bearing on your ability to abide by the principles you agree to set yourself to when you when don the uniform, whether you agree or not politically. If the Lynx players had harassed the cops you would have a case. They did not, and the cops didn't bother to ask for context, they simply assumed this was a statement against them directly, or they're just authoritarian assholes to begin with.