Kyle Rittenhouse given donations by police and other officials... (1 Viewer)

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,716
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
So we move from getting fired from a job to just repercussions, whatever those may be. To various degrees, no one is truly free of repercussions from their actions. If you know someone who gave money to David Duke's campaign, would your opinion of that person change? It'll surely change mine, which would be a repercussion of their actions.

That last statement is interesting... but maybe for another discussion.

In any case, statements of principle are fine, and in some cases they apply just fine, but there are other cases where factors around situations have to be considered, which may invalidate the principle in that particular instance, as it is the case in the OP.

Yeah, I think we're not too far apart. Fair points.
 

Optimus Prime

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
2,369
Age
44
Location
Washington DC Metro
Offline
It's a slippery slope to be sure

At it's worst it has shades of McCarthyism

"Are you now or have ever been a member of the Communist Party?"

Being a current or former member of the communist party was never against the law

There is a line somewhere, but where is it and who decides
 

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Midwest
Offline
I agree that people should do what they want on their own time, but people also need to realize that their actions tell what they are thinking and that there may be repercussions depending on what they are saying or doing. Certain organizations and/or philosophies should have stigmas.
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,716
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
I agree that people should do what they want on their own time, but people also need to realize that their actions tell what they are thinking and that there may be repercussions depending on what they are saying or doing. Certain organizations and/or philosophies should have stigmas.

But who gets to decide that? What might be acceptable to a large group of people might not be to another group. The extremists in either party don't speak for the broader parties. There are limits sure. If a group is not doing anything illegal, people should be able make their own personal decisions apart from the work they do.

It's not my business who you support or donate to and it's not your business how I spend my money as long as it's legal.

And I'm certainly not going to volunteer info that people don't have a need to know of.

Tbh, how I spend my money is pretty boring anyway. :hihi:
 

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Midwest
Offline
If your employer finds out you are an extremist they could take action, so in that case they would decide. I personally have changed my opinion of people when I have found out they are racist, for example. They probably do not care that I have changed my opinion of them, but that’s still a consequence for their views. If I employed them it may affect their employment, depending on factors. Like do they advertise these views, has it affected their job performance, have they treated customers or coworkers badly.
 

CoolBrees

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
847
Reaction score
1,946
Age
44
Location
Portland, Oregon
Offline
@DaveXA -

while I can understand your position, he works in the public domain so he has different rules. Even more so when it comes to LEOs because they directly interact with the public. You can’t operate in that capacity if you are not viewed as a officer of the peace and public safety.

And this isn’t just some political party he is donating to. It’s the defense fund for a accused murderer of protesters.

So let’s remove the context from the case. Do you think it is reasonable for a police officer to donate money to an accused murderer’s defense fund?
 

DaveXA

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 6, 2018
Messages
2,716
Reaction score
1,956
Location
Vienna, VA (via Lafayette)
Offline
@DaveXA -

while I can understand your position, he works in the public domain so he has different rules. Even more so when it comes to LEOs because they directly interact with the public. You can’t operate in that capacity if you are not viewed as a officer of the peace and public safety.

And this isn’t just some political party he is donating to. It’s the defense fund for a accused murderer of protesters.

So let’s remove the context from the case. Do you think it is reasonable for a police officer to donate money to an accused murderer’s defense fund?

No, and most certainly not using official police property and email accounts. I'm not saying he shouldn't be fired. I'm just questioning how he was outed.

That said, if he's using official email accounts, he has no expectation of privacy. I work for the government, and they tell you very clearly when you're hired, at work, your activities can and will be monitored. No expectation of privacy.

They're still required to protect people's PII though.
 

samiam5211

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 1, 2019
Messages
1,437
Reaction score
1,813
Age
43
Location
Earth
Offline
No, and most certainly not using official police property and email accounts. I'm not saying he shouldn't be fired. I'm just questioning how he was outed.

That said, if he's using official email accounts, he has no expectation of privacy. I work for the government, and they tell you very clearly when you're hired, at work, your activities can and will be monitored. No expectation of privacy.

They're still required to protect people's PII though.

I think it came into the public domain because the site where the donations were made was hacked.

The police department was only reacting to the information becoming public, the department didn’t make it public.
 

B4YOU

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2019
Messages
379
Reaction score
618
Age
41
Location
DC
Offline
Is it?
Let me modify the question: you own a day care, and you learn one of your employees is corresponding with and sending donations to NAMBLA on their own time using their own computer and their personal email. What do you do?

It is fine to make statements like "people should not get fired for donating or expressing their opinions" in principle, but there are exceptions to rules.
I think you are comparing apples and oranges. One is a group arguing to allow the molestation of children and the other is a go fund me page for an accused murder. Would you fire anyone who donated to the page of a yet to be convicted person?
 

B4YOU

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 29, 2019
Messages
379
Reaction score
618
Age
41
Location
DC
Offline
So we move from getting fired from a job to just repercussions, whatever those may be. To various degrees, no one is truly free of repercussions from their actions. If you know someone who gave money to David Duke's campaign, would your opinion of that person change? It'll surely change mine, which would be a repercussion of their actions.

That last statement is interesting... but maybe for another discussion.

In any case, statements of principle are fine, and in some cases they apply just fine, but there are other cases where factors around situations have to be considered, which may invalidate the principle in that particular instance, as it is the case in the OP.
About 39% of Louisiana voted for David Duke in 1991. Should 39% of Louisianians be permanently unemployable? If we leaked the voter rolls today, would it be ok to fire someone for that vote?
 

MT15

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 13, 2019
Messages
4,415
Reaction score
7,344
Location
Midwest
Offline
I think you are comparing apples and oranges. One is a group arguing to allow the molestation of children and the other is a go fund me page for an accused murder. Would you fire anyone who donated to the page of a yet to be convicted person?

So, yes, he is an accused murderer, multiple murders, but the facts are not really in doubt. It is a fact that he killed two men carrying an illegal weapon. I take your point, but the man who was fired used his work account, IIRC. He shouldn’t have had any expectation of privacy to begin with. I was always taught that you should probably assume everything on the internet is public always.

A public servant used his work email to contribute to the defense of a young man who killed two men using a weapon he possessed illegally. He stated to the young man “you did nothing wrong”. Maybe it’s not such a terrible firing? I’m not sure this public servant should be in a position of public trust. His judgement is terrible.
 

Optimus Prime

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
2,369
Age
44
Location
Washington DC Metro
Offline
If this cop had used his personal account but was still outed would/should he still been fired?

That's a trickier question
 

Optimus Prime

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
2,369
Age
44
Location
Washington DC Metro
Offline
About 39% of Louisiana voted for David Duke in 1991. Should 39% of Louisianians be permanently unemployable? If we leaked the voter rolls today, would it be ok to fire someone for that vote?


Where is the line?

What is the distinction between voting for David Duke KKK leader and donating money to the KKK?

Is, "I'm voting for Duke for his tax plans not his racist ideologies" an acceptable out?

Like I said, it's a slippery, slippery slope and I don't think there is an easy answer
 

Saintamaniac

Rise Sons of the Gold & Purple
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
752
Reaction score
1,481
Age
51
Location
Laplace, LA
Offline
Where is the line?

What is the distinction between voting for David Duke KKK leader and donating money to the KKK?

Is, "I'm voting for Duke for his tax plans not his racist ideologies" an acceptable out?

Like I said, it's a slippery, slippery slope and I don't think there is an easy answer
It is a slippery slope. Fortunately, people still have the right to not work for a company or organization that would care so much about their image that they would fire someone for making a donation to the defense fund of an accused killer.

The company has the right to act and so does the employee. I'd say good luck in finding a public company not concerned about their public image though.....that or just don't donate to the defense fund of an accused killer and tell him he did nothing wrong from your work email account.
 

SystemShock

Uh yu ka t'ann
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
1,239
Location
Xibalba
Offline
I think you are comparing apples and oranges. One is a group arguing to allow the molestation of children and the other is a go fund me page for an accused murder. Would you fire anyone who donated to the page of a yet to be convicted person?
About 39% of Louisiana voted for David Duke in 1991. Should 39% of Louisianians be permanently unemployable? If we leaked the voter rolls today, would it be ok to fire someone for that vote?

It is apples and oranges because you continue to ask generic, abstract questions with a dab of hyperbole - see 2nd quote - whereas I am talking about specific situations. Asking "is it OK to kill another person?" most likely (hopefully) elicits a different response than asking "is it OK to kill another person who breaks into your house in the middle of the night, who is trying to stab you in the neck with a knife while yelling 'I am going to kill you and your family!' ?".

I am not comparing molestation with a murder accusation. And actually, that association in and on itself isn't illegal. I learned about them in the mid 90's, as they had a convention in the The District, when I was living there; I couldn't believe some members were interviewed on TV distributing pamphlets on the streets. I don't know if things have changed, but back then they were protected by the 1st Amendment as long as their "literature" wasn't explicit.

As for people who voted for Duke, if I am running a Jewish community center or hiring for BET, chances are I don't want to hire a racist.
 

SystemShock

Uh yu ka t'ann
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,121
Reaction score
1,239
Location
Xibalba
Offline
Where is the line?

What is the distinction between voting for David Duke KKK leader and donating money to the KKK?

Is, "I'm voting for Duke for his tax plans not his racist ideologies" an acceptable out?

Like I said, it's a slippery, slippery slope and I don't think there is an easy answer

No one votes for David Duke for his tax plans.

If there is a line, it is the principles of the 1st Amendment. After that, while there are some cases that are clear as day, you have to look at all of the factors in specific situations. Kind of like, you wouldn't hire the fox to guard the hen house, but you'd hire him to guard the cows.
 

Optimus Prime

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
2,369
Age
44
Location
Washington DC Metro
Offline
No one votes for David Duke for his tax plans.

If there is a line, it is the principles of the 1st Amendment. After that, while there are some cases that are clear as day, you have to look at all of the factors in specific situations. Kind of like, you wouldn't hire the fox to guard the hen house, but you'd hire him to guard the cows.


I like that fox analogy

but what would that mean for the Duke voter?

If you're a loan officer for a bank dealing with black people that's a hard no but if you're a truck driver you're good to go?

Being racist has no bearing on being able to drive from A to B
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Advertisement

General News Feed

Fact Checkers News Feed

Sponsored

Top Bottom