If you've agreed to wear the damn thing in exchange for a paycheck, then that sort of cheating would be dishonest.
You didn't quit either. When they said "mask up or leave" and you didn't leave, then you agreed.
Yep, just like if they told you to start cleaning the bathrooms and you just said "fuck it, nope" and left them to fend for themselves, but didn't tell your boss.
Incorrect. Can your employer record privileged communications between you and your lawyer at work ? How about if an employee wants to talk to the union delegate or shop steward about unsafe or illegal conditions?
So if the hospital said we want cleaner toilets and the hospital administrator said, I want you Dr so-and-so to clean the toilets , the doctor has to? Despite being hired and contracted to be a doctor there?
I never said they were doing something illegal.
Lots of utter bullshit is backed by union greviances and court cases. That proves nothing.
If it’s just to hide something from your employer—- like discussion about your work conditions or illegal acts by the employer with the person who can do something about it, and by law has access to the worksite to observe those conditions and have “privileged” ( at least from the employer)conversations , you would be right. —- and by law- that’s on job time. Especially if the employee needs to know if if what he or she what the employer is telling them to do is legal or not. In a cop’s life—- that is quite often and you as Joe citizen definitely want the cop to have that ability and remain anonymous while doing it.
That’s different if they are getting rid of that position. Then give the doctor is contracted severance pay as he walks out the door.
There is a lot of BS out there in all sorts of law.
nypost.com
We cannot see if he is digging in his pants for something.
Laying on his hands, refusing to be cuffed.
So laying on hands = closed first punches into concrete?
Well of course you take everything out of context.
That makes you a rare cop.
I say this a lot, people would be surprised at how many good, great, cops are out there. They do their jobs well, most are not out to violate the Rights of the people. We hear very little of them, because their stories are boring.
Im talking about the cops who take the "im going home" thing waaaay too far and constantly violate rights to make it happen.
Alton Stirling was an example of the suspect resisting and had a gun.
Your statements say a lot about your work conditions and what you have deal with on a day to day basis. Some of us have/had a different environment.. A Lilly white ( for lack of better description ) neighborhood like a Mayberry, USA is not where you are dealing with people who attack police as a rite of passage like the places some officers work .
www.poam.net
If officer safety was half as important as people claim, then they would end traffic stops for anything short of a felony.Your statements say a lot about your work conditions and what you have deal with on a day to day basis. Some of us have/had a different environment.. A Lilly white ( for lack of better description ) neighborhood like a Mayberry, USA is not where you are dealing with people who attack police as a rite of passage like the places some officers work .
Stuff can happen anywhere and I want you not to become the next statistic .
I know you saw this before but let’s educate the others on the forum
This is the profile of the officers who get killed on the job. It’s not the hard ass. It’s officer friendly.
Behavioral Characteristics That Often Resolve Badly for Cops
In 1993, a FBI research team delivered a simple but compelling message: there are certain behavioral characteristics that get cops killed.
The phases used to describe them are:
“Tends to perceive self as more public relations than law enforcement,”
“well-liked,” “laid back,” and “easy going.”
“Victim officers tended “to use less force than other officers felt they would use in similar circumstances”—-, some trainers are noticing that some officers today seem so hesitant about using force that it appears they are more afraid of being sued or thought overzealous than they are of being murdered!”
“officers who ended up dead often relied heavily on their perceived ability to “read” people and situations. They depended on “a rapid or abbreviated process” by which they analyzed environments and subjects and, based on their quick perceptions or feel, “acted accordingly”
Commonly they were optimists; they tended “to look for good’ in others.”
When they saw signs of cooperation, heard promises not to cause trouble, enjoyed a prior history of non-violent contacts with a suspect, sensed they had rapport, and the like, they tended to feel they were home free, rather than maintaining a mind-set that stays open to subtle and not-so subtle shifts in every interaction. Regrettably, the research team points out, “victim officers’ evaluations of offenders often prove inaccurate.”
