1
44

[–] Genghis_Khan 1 points 44 points (+45|-1) ago 

It's alarming that this was even a question to begin with. It seems obvious and intuitive that if your job is to uphold a Constitution, and said Constitution has a free speech clause, then "speaking freely" to police officers is something you're allowed.

0
20

[–] Clayton 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Some states have disorderly conduct laws. Police are able to arrest you for swearing and using abusive language according to some states statutes on disorderly conduct. That is the law being challenged here.

1
16

[–] Genghis_Khan 1 points 16 points (+17|-1) ago 

Good thing. A cop should be able to handle a "hey man, don't be such an ass hole" without the need to arrest someone. Now, swearing at a cop and displaying aggressive body language (approaching aggressively, etc.) I think is a different thing entirely. Nobody should be assaulted, cops are also citizens.

1
6

[–] TinyPlasticRobot 1 points 6 points (+7|-1) ago  (edited ago)

It is a good thing that the courts are ruling this way. It s a good thing that the DISORDERLY CONDUCT OF THE POLICE is being challenged. The legality of saying something to a cop, regardless of what it is (other than threatening them) should never even be questioned. Is it disrespectful; yeah. Is it illegal; hell no.

EDITED for clarification, My original comment may have been misconstrued.

0
2

[–] barset 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The profanity laws I get and I don't because it seems unconstitutional. I get it because some people don't want to take their kids to the mall and hear 37 fucks in a row, but honestly that's still a parent's plight since it's their job to instill a broad vocabulary and when to and not to use certain words.

2
-2

[–] sadam029 2 points -2 points (+0|-2) ago  (edited ago)

Is the abusive language clearly defined? Or is it up for interpretation?

0
0

[–] battle 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I never mouth off to cops, you pick the wrong one, they plant drugs or a gun on you and your life is over.

0
0

[–] makingreen 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Read my mind

0
0

[–] Skwerley 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

it's entirely unsurprising. "Investigating" has become the all-inclusive term for cops to do whatever the fuck they want. Detaining me illegally? Oh he's investigating a crime so it's cool. Shot my dog in my yard when he was looking for my neighbors? Oh no, just investigating, move along.

6
20

[–] Mattk50 6 points 20 points (+26|-6) ago  (edited ago)

But the police also have to right to beat the shit out of you then arrest you while ignoring all of your rights without punishment. So, for now, its probably still a bad idea to do that.

1
9

[–] brother_tempus 1 points 9 points (+10|-1) ago 

But the police also have to right to beat the shit out of you then arrest you while ignoring all of your rights without punishment.

The civil litigation payouts that cities and states have paid out shows this not to be true

1
17

[–] TinyPlasticRobot 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

It gets difficult to enjoy those payouts when your dead or comatose from major brain damage.

0
7

[–] Ellen_Kung_Pao 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Right, but that's our money. It doesn't come from the cop who beat you, or their family or the station.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
1

[–] carlip 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Generally the officer, himself, doing the beating sees very little repercussions from doing this.

1
3

[–] Arxces 1 points 3 points (+4|-1) ago 

Sad that this is so close to reality, but freedom of speech cannot exist as a right if that speech attracts punishment from the government.

0
1

[–] GrumpyMidlifeCrisis 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

This is very true. If the government tells you that you can do one thing but doing so results in charges like obstruction of justice or resisting arrest then you're not really allowed to do those things, are you?

It reminds me of the officers that will walk across the street to harass an individual who is filming them and then arrest that individual for not obeying a lawful order or obstructing justice or whatever. They're obviously bullshit charges and a direct response to a right that was upheld by the courts--The right to film police officers.

0
0

[–] Megaptera 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I'm sensing sarcasm here.

0
0

[–] sadam029 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This comment brought to you by NAPO.

0
0

[–] Mattk50 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Dont even get me started on police unions.

3
13

[–] Apocolipticbeulah 3 points 13 points (+16|-3) ago 

I get we have seen a few bad apples and now the media jumps on and reports the shit out of any cop f-up. The whole cop pile on thing is getting old - 99% of these guys are there to keep us safe and are put in horrible situations daily. I support the police and am happy that they are willing to take on a brutal job that they put there life's at risk daily for and like teachers are grossly underpaid.

1
17

[–] heili 1 points 17 points (+18|-1) ago 

Police work isn't even the top ten for most dangerous jobs in the United States.

If you want to appreciate someone whose life is at risk on a daily basis, appreciate loggers, oil rig workers and highway construction laborers.

0
12

[–] sadam029 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Don't forget pizza delivery guys and trash man. Both far more dangerous than being a cop.

0
8

[–] ReadShift 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

A few bad apples spoils the bunch!

0
3

[–] ObscureReference 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This few bad apples line has been getting old. It is maybe number 11-13 most dangerous in the US, control for traffic accidents and it just isn't that brutal. Ignoring it is a position you choose to take. There are police boards, mostly firewalled, that will love to take this logic and run with it. I don't think this aging line of BS trusted anymore by anyone but LEOs.

0
2

[–] Jdeputy 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I have never had any issues with any cops I've come across. Most seem to be friendly and just trying to do their job. With that said I'm sure there are a lot of bad cops out there as well, but I highly doubt the vast majority are as bad as the media likes to make them out to be.

0
0

[–] GrumpyMidlifeCrisis 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

This is the 100% honest truth: Of the three police encounters I've had in my life, all three of them lied and directly violated either my rights or someone else's rights. Two of them lied under oath. One of them busted down someone's door and pulled a gun on him and his family because his boss (he worked at a furniture plant) accused him of stealing a single chair.

0
6

[–] Redeyedjedi 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Yeah, but when they arrest you on made up charges, don't be surprised. If you're going to do this you better have audio and video recording, and it better upload to cloud so when they destroy your phone or delete your content it still exists.

0
3

[–] brother_tempus 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Yeah, but when they arrest you on made up charges, don't be surprised.

All the more reason to challenge and resist the police as well as looking for other solutions like a private police force and the abolishment of the illegal state monopoly of this industry

1
12

[–] HilariouslyViolent 1 points 12 points (+13|-1) ago 

Because private prisons have worked so well. Let's just hook up the addict directly to the supplier.

0
2

[–] barset 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Private police force is the worst case since we are already facing an overpowered corporate complex they could just buy the legislation to practice as they see fit. For examples see TPP and the current private prison situations.

1
4

[–] Sydviciouz 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

I think this is getting ridiculous. If a cop used abusive language and profanity, they would get ridiculed.

When did all of these people get so entitled? I don't care what anyone says, cops are there to enforce the law.

You can't provoke policemen. That's absolutely fucking stupid, and you're asking for it.

If you're running towards a policeman after robbing a place... then you're asking for it.

If you've held a woman at gun point and hid out somewhere and the police are trying to subdue you while you resist. Fuck you. You're asking for it.

If you thrash yourself around in a police van while restrained after being caught obviously doing some thing, you're asking for it.

Fuck all of this cop hate. You idiots need to stop killing each other and provoking police officers and civilians, and stop fucking rioting and ruining your cities every time a criminal gets shot.

0
3

[–] turbo77 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Where are you from? I've had police use profanity on me and it's pretty common in the US.

0
0

[–] GrumpyMidlifeCrisis 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

It's EXTREMELY common. I'm not sure this person is speaking factually.

1
2

[–] Hobys 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

"I don't care what anyone says, cops are there to enforce the law."

Yeah, except for when, yaknow... they're not.

Kinda like all of the times that cops kill or harm someone who has done absolutely nothing wrong or the cop could not have known had done anything wrong at the time (it may be discovered later that the subject was guilty of something, still doesn't make it okay, though).

But those cases don't happen in your fairytale land, right?

1
1

[–] Sydviciouz 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

Don't be naive.

Yes, I understand that there are fucked up cops out there that have done fucked up things. I know a lot of police men personally. I also stand by the statement that there really are a few bad apples that spoil the bunch. I blame the media for that. Good cop stories don't make the cut.

This country would be shit (not saying it isn't headed in that direction) without the police force. Don't act so high and mighty when there are actually people risking their lives for you while you bitch about them on the Internet.

1
0

[–] Ashi 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

What about the Fighting Words Doctrine? I'm asking because I'm a bit ignorant and want to know why the Washington Supreme Court said this despite it. I thought anything considered fighting words wasn't protected under the first amendment.

0
1

[–] Everythingisachoice 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

0
1

[–] GrumpyMidlifeCrisis 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

It seems like there are a surprising number of downvoats for posts that are critical of police and an even larger number of upvoats for posts supporting police; both of these things being completely independent of the quality of the post. It does look like upvoat/downvoat brigades are here and being perpetuated mostly by individuals with a bias or opinion.

Remember, the upvoats and downvoats are not agree or disagree buttons. They should be used to judge the quality of the post and whether or not it contributes, in a reasonable and logical manner, to the conversation.

0
1

[–] sturle 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Not the same in Norway: An angry man called a cop a "horse cock" (hæstkuk). They dragged him to court. He was acquitted. Not due to free speech, but because it was considered normal to call people horse cocks in that rural part of the country.

0
1

[–] flyawayhigh 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

It seems strange that such a basic case would be litigated to this level at this time. I've seen quite a few of these at the national Supreme Court though. Here's what I think is happening in many, including this one.

These concepts were simply accepted for hundreds of years. Nobody would have dreamed that some young person cursing at police could be convicted of a crime legitimately on that basis. Nobody would have imagined that such a case would be possible.

Today, with the general reactionary political climate, the extreme anti-freedom crowd is going way back to test this basic unquestioned assumptions that have not been challenged, hoping to cut out as much of the Bill of Rights as possible.

Often, these unprecedented challenges to basic known values succeed. For example, in the 2004 Hiibel case, a slim majority of the Supreme Court permitted police to ask for 'papers please.'

load more comments ▼ (8 remaining)