Off duty police officer sacked

[AtoZ]

guns
been here before..
ban guns, just use a car instead.
ban cars, ban fags, ban beer..

 

[godsoftandjoearedull]

guns
been here before..
ban guns, just use a car instead.
ban cars, ban fags, ban beer..

I'm sure most of us would rather ban softus .

 

[Blasphemous]

pah
you think you're the only one to see anything nasty?
i can tell you from experience that my skin does not crawl when i see something nasty. i feel a sadness and then i move on.
best not to get into a p******g contest with someone online because it cannot be won. i'll use your words shall i?
''You don't know the first thing about me or my life''
that said, i'd bet on me, if we were to see who's been more 'active' so to speak!

Yawn!!! OK you bet on you then.

come on mr hard done by, shall we get back to your pathetic argument..which government? which party? who was the law designed to exclude? how many laws have been made and then changed since that exclusion was passed.

do you obey every single rule mr hypocrite... can i call you mr hypocrite



for someone who's 'got the tee shirt',i think you are naive in the extreme if you think police, on or off duty, wont have an opinion.

You can call me anything you want. I never said I have 'got the tee shirt'. And I'm really not that interested in what you have and haven't seen or been touched by in your life. You made the absurd statement that...

police see real life, the rest of us see the bbc,s view. no wonder some of them would be bnp....

Your statement is flawed as you have no idea what I or indeed

'the rest of us'

have seen in the past and/or on a daily basis. As i said, you don't know the first thing about me.

I never at any point said or inferred that police officers wouldn't have an opinion. I'd be amazed if they didn't. But I have an opinion on many things, just as you have, that doesn't mean to say you or I can break the rules.

As for who introduced the rules, which party etc etc etc etc etc I don't give a ****! Take it or leave it, as I have said previously but will not say again after this point, the rules were in place when he joined, when he broke them and when he was sacked. If you and/or he cannot/will not accept that, fine but you still have no argument.

 

[AtoZ]

you started the ****ing contest but it seems its me whos wrong

you are pathetic!

i have' been more active than you and i can be sure ive seen more, and worse than you.. difference is that i didnt bleat about my hard done by life.
i havent had one.
it was you who made out they had the 'been there tee shirt' but it turns out that you are all fooking chat. you spend your day bleating on an internet forum and im supposed to be impressed..

pity you didnt answer any of the points raised in your attempt to turn things around on me.
the fact is that you dont know the answers, you made a stupid comment of the type that is obvious to anyone,that rules are rules.

you speed, use your phone in your car and do anything that suits you. after all, its everybody else who is wrong, never you..

we were talking about police so i thought it safe to assume that i could write police and accept that everyone involved would know i meant social workers, firemen, police, some soldiers, nurses......im very sorry i didnt include never wrong, word twisting hard done by(and not so hard done by) keyboard warriors who ive never met!!
so so sorry i cleary didnt allow for ******* or the homeless..


..............

every policeman will know those rules but that dont make them right..

jesus, i suspect you say neh neh neh rules are rules..

you're pathetic and hypocritical..

i can tell you're gonna be like that stuff on my shoe, impossible to shake off..

 

[Blasphemous]

Go and have a lie down in a dark room, you sound like you need it.
Don't be so quick to say sorry man! You cannot help it if you don't understand. Don't let it upset you.
Oh by the way, don't expect to see all of yours or my comments here later AtoZ, a MOD will probably delete at least half of them. I think we've probably broken the rules!!!

 

[gant]

is it not a case that there are people who shout racist without knowing the exact definition,as in, treat and believe a race to be inferior.

Ironic beyond measure surely?

The exact definition, if there is just the one, doesn't include active discrimination - believing is enough. And it does include the option of believing one race to be superior to all others.

Thanks for doing correction Softus I just thought the majority of the punters would be savvy enough to know what I meant. I bet they`re really glad your on hand to enlighten them.

 

[Thermo]

every policeman will know those rules but that dont make them right..
:

why arent they right?

 

[gant]

every policeman will know those rules but that dont make them right..
:

why arent they right?

He might have the PACE act of 1984 in mind where the role of the police altered.

 

[mark vincent]

The rules are in controvention of the humans rights act, you are not supposed to discriminate on the grounds of political beliefs. The BNP is a legitimate political party, if you not allowed to be a member of one political party then policemen shouldn't be allowed to be a member of any political party. What about the Freemasons lots of police are members of that organisation but they are still allowed to remain in the police.

 

[Blasphemous]

The rules are in controvention of the humans rights act, you are not supposed to discriminate on the grounds of political beliefs. The BNP is a legitimate political party, if you not allowed to be a member of one political party then policemen shouldn't be allowed to be a member of any political party. What about the Freemasons lots of police are members of that organisation but they are still allowed to remain in the police.

The Freemasons aren't a Political Party tosser.

Look lads, all joking and sniping aside, I agree that these rules seem unfair but they are the rules. We could go on with this for weeks debating the validity of them but it won't make a hapeth of difference.

 

[Thermo]

The rules are in controvention of the humans rights act, you are not supposed to discriminate on the grounds of political beliefs. The BNP is a legitimate political party, if you not allowed to be a member of one political party then policemen shouldn't be allowed to be a member of any political party. What about the Freemasons lots of police are members of that organisation but they are still allowed to remain in the police.

Is this really that hard to understand?

They are NOT allowed to be a member of ANY political party.

 

[Softus]

i do understand because i have been subjected to similar rules.
the bnp rule does not apply but other similar restrictions have applied to me in my working life.

Similar, and yet, it would seem, not the same.

i know thermo was plod and as such will not speak out where he would damage serving officers.
thermo might have said it twice softus but lets be clear here, the police dont make rules, they follow them!

OK - you want to be clear, so let's be clear:

1. I've never been in the police force.
2. I have the same view of the rules as Thermo.
3. The police, in this particular case, do make the rules that apply to employment within the police force.

i do have a left bias but i am not all theoretical like you!

You've managed to make it obvious that you don't know very much about me.

i would have hanging back whereas you will argue against, for political rather than realistic reasons.

My views on hanging are well documented on this web site, but you haven't read them. So let's hear what you think my views are, and the reasons for them...

you link too many points, that are not proven, into what is a simple argument and then spend the time trying to belittle anybody with a different view.

Please show me where I have linked too many points. When you answer, please bear in mind the following post, which was my first on this topic:

No, he wasn't.

And what would be wrong with that?

Too many linked points for you there?
______________________

And how about these, from my second post on this topic:

Not according to the BBC.

According to the BBC, Acting Assistant Chief Constable Terry Sweeney, head of the Professional Standards Branch, said: "Item six of the Chief Constable's Order of 2004...makes it clear that officers are banned from being members of the BNP, Combat 18 or the National Front.

"This requirement extends into the private lives of police officers and police staff."

Why do you think that prohibition of BNP membership for Police Officers is the same thing as a voting restriction?

If the BBC's information is correct, then you would lose.

Too many linked points?
____________________

why is that opportunity denied to the people that society is supposed to trust the most, the police.

For the very reason that a police force riddled with BNP members would quickly lose the trust of its public. Are you not old enough to remember the National Front?!

 

[Softus]

I'm sure most of us would rather ban softus.

Very well then.

Have a poll. If the majority want me to go, then I'm gone.

 

[gant]

For the very reason that a police force riddled with BNP members would quickly lose the trust of its public. Are you not old enough to remember the National Front?!

The PACE act of 1984 changed the role of the police from a force to a service. In 2008. I wonder how much trust the public have in that service.

 

[gremlin16]

None