Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
political correctness gone mad or the righteous persecution of evil racists in public life?
that would make it virtually impossible to police properly. Because you're a member of a party which openly considers members of a certain religion to be inferior citizens. And a policeman can't be allowed to publicly agree with that.
And even if he did police fairly, he wouldn't be able to arrest any Muslim without them being able taking court action and standing a very good chance of winning.
about this earlier, but it was too long and boring for me to remember what happened. interesting, no?
What group would you be biased against if you wore a Che Guevara shirt? Businessmen?
It's not really the same thing, is it?
no policemen should be allowed to demonstrate any political alliance at all?
fuck the babylon.
there's a very clear code policemen have to adher to. Part of that is treating everyone equally and not treating ethnic minorities differently. If you're a member of an organisation (legal or not) which believes Muslims are at best second-class citizens, they cannot be in a position to police properly. And like I say, the police also have an interest in building trust with minority groups. Continuing to employ a man who publicly supports a political party which is anti-Muslim makes it much more difficult for the police in that area to connect with the Muslim community, which is essential for all sorts of reasons.
But then you know all that.
who are publicly part of sects which openly view certain members of the community as inferior or not worthy of the same rights as everyone else, then absolutely they shouldn't be allowed to police. How could they possibly?
I'm not sure any of your examples fit in with that, though. Being a member of the BNP clearly does.
If a Muslim policeman publicly joined a party which was anti-white, he would be sacked in an instant. There's no double standard.
if he signed up to be the member of the Church Against Faggotry, he'd be sacked. If he was a member of a mosque which was run by people who condemned homosexuals, he wouldn't be directly subscribing to their views on that issue, necessarily. Whereas with the BNP, that's more or less all they talk about.
Incidentally, if there were a Muslim officer who was a member of a mosque which was very overtly homophobic, I'm sure he'd be pressured out of the job much like this guy. Once the media pick up on something like this, not hard if you publicise it, your position quickly becomes untenable. And rightly so.
There's left-wing, and then there's just being plain daft.
There are many strands of religions and these stereotypical views you trot out are just bigoted. However, you know precisely what the BNP stand for - you can read their mandate online. Maybe sign up while you're there?
Comparing the two is indefensible.
Bearing in mind the word 'overtly'. It's more or less only the BNP. The majority of their campaigning is about how undesirable muslims are.
that there are some members of the BNP, NF etc that don't subscribe to ALL their beliefs? In no way am i defending the bnp or any of those parties at all, but just because someone is say a member of the labour party doesn't automatically mean they agree with everything they're doing for the economy?
But anyway, he was rightly dismissed as he knew about the rule and openly broke it.
it's like saying a member of the Green party might not really care about the environment. They obviously do. That's why both parties exist.
It clearly said membership of the BNP was banned and likely to lead to dismissal. So the guy broke the rules and was sacked. End of.
It's also banned for police officers to hold union membership - I'd expect anyone who did to be sacked as well.
Seems fair enough towards non whites that been on the receiving end of racism in the force.
This has nothing to do with fairness nor political correctness. It's down to the practicalities of community policing. Can you imagine how much it would undermine policing in this country if it were revealed that membership of the BNP was, say 3 times higher in the police than the general population?
if a member of the cabinet came out and said they hated Muslims, they'd be sacked because they'd be presenting a very poor image of the party. The police has to uphold similar standards. It's unavoidable in a line of work that relies so heavily on public confidence in fairness and unbiased policing.
Next thing you know they'll be sacking people for like child porn, I mean it's in there spare time :P
than a BNP member.
go piss off and listen to some more white power records
Is whiting up considered as bad as blacking up is?
really...worse than Duran Duran's
You're whiter than Peter Crouch's kneecaps in a fridge.
One less member of the BNP in the public eye is a good thing.
It's not political correctness gone mad... it's the right thing to do. A ballerina who supports the BNP, I can tolerate; but a rozzer in Salford?
Fuck that. And if you think the BNP should be recognised as a legitimate party simply because they already are, then you're a fucking bigot. It's a judgement call - and I'm making it.
Barnbrook next, please.
that supports the condemnation of various races and religious groups by various measures of force including intimidation and violence should quite clear be told to fucking do one.
that Hamas were never given the opportunity to govern in the West Bank and Gaza?
Would prefer to sell to shoreditch vampire of Indian descent.
The police showed numerous times that they cannot be trusted to police society fairly and that is why they have to fill in forms and do paperwork. It's just to combat the semi natural desire of many of them to be cunts. The few spoil it for the many, whichever way round you want to attach the names.
How come its alright to be a councillor but not a policeman?
BNP members are allowed to propose laws but not allowed to enforce them?
He was not a member of the BNP. The police said there was no evidence of him being a member of the BNP.
A police officer is not allowed to be a member of any political organisation, as it affects the impartiality of the office of constable.
What worries me is that they searched his house over a disciplinary matter. Now, the Complaints and Discpline department would have had to convince a magistrate that there was evidence of a criminal act to do that. Search powers are granted by s8, s18 + s32 PACE, s26 theft act, s23 misuse of drugs act and s46 firearms act and the various terrorism acts. There are a couple of other search powers. These all need information and intelligence behind them. This suggests to me that there is more to this than has been released.
I don't agree with his views, but I will defend his right to hold them. On the face of it, it is closer to thought policing.
Also compare this with the case of a Pc who fled the scene of a crash, leaving some people for dead. He was docked one weeks wages. Doesn't exactly seem proportionate does it? http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/131/131760_police_chief_faces_quiz_over_pc_who_fled_crash.html
I would look so shocked.
A s18 search needs to be justifiable and needs to be signed off by an Inspector or higher, a s32 search is confined only to where that person has been immediately prior to arrest.
Did he meet his sanction detections quota this month?
i agree with Pigfoot, police officers should not be seen to be prejudiced against any minority (or majority) group. of course every person's got some small prejudices against someone or other, but to be willing to do something as openly declarative as being a member of the BNP is in direct conflict with the idea of policing fairly and reasonably
but he wasn't a BNP member.
don't run, epescially if you a policeman
Slightly different to running. More like having a very heavy push.