Should Police Officers Be Able To Join Racist Organisations?

Originally posted by Bardock42
Hmm, I don't know how it is in the UK, but in Germany if you state "I voted for ..." it is a much weaker statement then "I'm a meber of ..."

You'd associate a stronger conviction with a person who calls themselves a member, especially since members of a political party is a very small part of all voters.

perhaps....obviously not with me though as i stated

and it also brings me back to the question of whether some of the people who have voted for and/or become members of the BNP would have done so if there was a party with a more moderate opinion...somewhere between them and the conservative party

i also think that there is going to be a huge problem in this country when someone from the BNP does get voted to the house of commons as an MP...as i have the strangest feeling that the government will block it, thus casting a huge doubt over the validity of democracy

although there has been a precedent for it in the case of Bobby Sands...although he was elected as an MP while in prison and was banned from taking his place on that principle...and the law was changed to stop prisoners from running for election

although that begs the question would the government ban people from running for election who had right wing ideas

Originally posted by jaden101
perhaps....obviously not with me though as i stated

and it also brings me back to the question of whether some of the people who have voted for and/or become members of the BNP would have done so if there was a party with a more moderate opinion...somewhere between them and the conservative party

Another question of course is how far the government should be allowed to decide which democratic political parties are allowed and which aren't.

well as for the question in the initial post...i don't think the belief or disbelief in a law is inextricably linked to the ability to uphold that law...i believe that someone can personally believe an individual law to be wrong but still have enough respect for law as a whole to uphold it.

i also believe that in a democracy, freedom of political belief is paramount...and any undermining of it is dangerous

it's a country of bizarre contradictions though...we allow IRA terrorists to become MP's but we don't allow police officers to support right wing parties

Well, I guess the problem is not their support, but the fear that they might abuse their powers towards a particular group based on the beliefs that make them vote the way they do.

On the other hand, they don't seem to forbid them from voting whatever they want.

Yeah, that's what I was wondering about.

It makes sense to assume what Bardock42 and Ushgarak said. That's what I assumed he meant. However, I was thinking of several exceptions.

Recently, there were several registered dems and republicans who voted for the opposing party.

Those are the exceptions, of course.

I was also thinking that those not registered, such as just about every member of my family who votes republican without fail, are every bit as active in their party of choice as a registered member.

I would say that there are those "soft-core" members too who are members only in name.

However, joining up with the BNP takes quite a bit of forethought when you're in law enforcement. It's not like a person who joins the Dems and doesn't do jack or holds little interest with the Dem party.

then that itself begs the question of whether he joined the BNP before or after he joined the police.

the irony is though that the BNP gets the reputation it does because it came from extremely racist beginnings...i.e the national front...which were basically a bunch of skinhead racist thugs...but like all political parties...they evolved...yet they are still considered a bunch of racist thugs...where as sinn fein started life as the political arm of a terrorist organisation that has killed over 2000 people in 30 years...yet they're are lauded as peace makers and were up for the nobel peace prize despite being lead by a former IRA sniper

Really i dont think ANYONE should be allowed to but of course not police officers. They should not be biased towards any one group or against any one group.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In the UK there has been controversy recently over the publication of the membership of the British Nationalist Party (a semi-neo nazi, racist group with quite a large representation in local government).

Due to the publication of the member-list policy officers all over the country who's name was found on the list have been suspended pending review as it is currently illegal to be both a police officer and a member of the BNP...the logic being that it is impossible for someone to belong to a group with views incompatible to the duties of a police officer.

However, is it right- especially considering freedom of political choice etc- for this restriction to exist? (If it is right should it be extended to all public offices, like teachers?)

Most police are racist anyway so it probably doesn't matter

I can't be for removing the rights of association for any individuals.

That being said, if the police as an organization have a policy against it, the issue is much different (though it is still a State policy, as the police are the arm of the state).

Originally posted by jaden101
where as sinn fein started life as the political arm of a terrorist organisation that has killed over 2000 people in 30 years...yet they're are lauded as peace makers and were up for the nobel peace prize despite being lead by a former IRA sniper

Members of the Quebecoise terrorist group, the FLQ, are now members of the provincial parliment in Quebec, and are largely lauded as local heroes.

I know its not the same as the IRA, but I sort of hear what you are saying. Sinn Fein certainly must be lauded for some advances in the political process, yet it is still run by these murderes and violent individuals. I also get the feeling that Sinn Fein covers and protects those who are violent within the IRA.

Voting simply fails.

Originally posted by inimalist

I know its not the same as the IRA, but I sort of hear what you are saying. Sinn Fein certainly must be lauded for some advances in the political process, yet it is still run by these murderes and violent individuals. I also get the feeling that Sinn Fein covers and protects those who are violent within the IRA.

the violence in northern ireland is still highly prevalent and perpetrated by people who still have close ties to Sinn Fein...namely ex IRA...because it is the people from these organisations (along with their opposites in the UVF etc) that are responsible for organised crime in northern ireland

but this stuff is conveniently brushed under the carpet to save the peace process...people who have committed bombings in the past are let out of jail years before their sentences are up...all in the name of the peace process

yet these people still have sway in the halls of power...but someone with right wing views that are far from meaning they will go and start murdering immigrants and terrorists are suspended from their jobs in the civil service because of their beliefs

so we welcome one kind of far more violent extremism into power and shun and ridicule a far less dangerous form of extremism

like i said in the baby Peter thread though...it's the product of an overly PC society...

In a word, no.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In the UK there has been controversy recently over the publication of the membership of the British Nationalist Party (a semi-neo nazi, racist group with quite a large representation in local government).

Due to the publication of the member-list policy officers all over the country who's name was found on the list have been suspended pending review as it is currently illegal to be both a police officer and a member of the BNP...the logic being that it is impossible for someone to belong to a group with views incompatible to the duties of a police officer.

However, is it right- especially considering freedom of political choice etc- for this restriction to exist? (If it is right should it be extended to all public offices, like teachers?)

well it turns out it wasn't a list of member's names but actually a list of people who had contacted the BNP through their website for any reason...so the man has been suspended for nothing...not only that but someone's car was torched last night because their name was on the list...despite the fact that it may have even been someone emailing them to criticise their policies

lol

racist hunts!

Originally posted by jaden101
well as for the question in the initial post...i don't think the belief or disbelief in a law is inextricably linked to the ability to uphold that law...i believe that someone can personally believe an individual law to be wrong but still have enough respect for law as a whole to uphold it.

i also believe that in a democracy, freedom of political belief is paramount...and any undermining of it is dangerous

it's a country of bizarre contradictions though...we allow IRA terrorists to become MP's but we don't allow police officers to support right wing parties

Terrorists? Freedom Fighters IMHO

terrorists....end of discussion

Not mutually exclusive.

Originally posted by jaden101
terrorists....end of discussion

Discussion restarted-

Freedom Fighters.

Originally posted by jaden101
terrorists....end of discussion

not all IRA are terrorists. nowadays, sure, you could argue it, but they weren't always like that, and its not every single member.