PAX Centurion - January / March 2016

www.bppa.org PAX CENTURION • January/March 2016 • Page 23 See First Amendment on page 24 “CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW….ABRIDGING THE FREEDOMOF SPEECH, OR OF THE PRESS…” – First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution (2016) - Amendment 1.A, subsection 643, paragraph 2,094, proposed by legions of those who desire to stamp out the first amendment – (for all but themselves…) “…EXCEPT IF SOMEBODY’S FEELINGS ARE HURT BYWHAT SOMEONE ELSE SAID, OF IF SOMEBODY DISAGREESWITH THEWORDS OR OPINIONS AND THEN CHARACTERIZES THE SPEAKER AS A “HATER” AND THEWORDS AS “HATE SPEECH”, ESPECIALLY IF THE SPEAKER OF SAID HATE SPEECH (AS DEFINED BY HASTILY-ASSEMBLED COMMITTEES OF POLITICALLY CORRECT PERSONS AND THEIR ALLIES IN THE MEDIA) IS A POLICE OFFICER, FIREFIGHTER, EMT, MEMBER OF THE MILITARY, OR ANY OTHER FIRST RESPONDER… THENTHE FIRSTAMENDMENTMAY BEABRIDGED… I N THE NAME OF GOD (OOOPS, now that will get me in trouble, too…) what has become of this country? Certain basic, inalienable rights, promulgated by our Nation’s founders and adopted into law in the United States Constitution in 1789, are under attack, and especially for first responders. Several recent cases have shown us that speaking one’s mind and expressing one’s opinion, even in private, can have devastating consequences for first responders who don’t have the resources – legally, monetarily, or intestinally, to fight the current climate of political correctness consuming our most basic liberties. InWeymouth, Mass., a firefighter posts on his Facebook page (the wisdom of posting ANYTHING on Facebook notwithstanding and subject to heated debate….) his frustration and anger with repeatedly responding to drug overdose calls and administering Narcan, an antidote to opioid injection, sometimes repeatedly to the same people. (Not for nothing, but FOX-25 TV recently ran an investigative piece on this very subject, so-called “frequent fliers” who think that Narcan’s availability has made them invulnerable to accidental death by overdose, and so continue tempting fate by using heroin). He is subsequently excoriated by the media and the general public, even though he has not taken any negative action and has simply expressed his opinion on social media. He is suspended for three months without pay, abandoned by his own firefighters union, and will be “re-educated” (geez, what other government does that? Hi, Kim Il- Sung!..... ) and reassigned to desk duty. In Detroit, a police sergeant posts a tongue-in-cheek opinion on his Facebook page comparing Beyoncé’s performance at the Super Bowl, mimicking the racist Black Panthers and insulting to police officers, to a theoretical appearance of the Ku Klux Klan at next year’s Super Bowl. “If this is OK” (showing a photo of Beyoncé’s dancers in Black Panther costume), then is this OK for next year’s Super Bowl?,” asks the Police Sergeant facetiously, showing a photo of robed Klansmen. Sparking calls from outraged people calling for his head on a platter, Does the First Amendment cover First Responders too? Do sensitive feelings andpolitical correctness trump-card free speech for police, fire&EMTs? By James W. Carnell, Pax Editor the Detroit police chief launches “an investigation” and restricts the Sergeant to administrative duty pending the outcome. The first amendment is a strange thing, isn’t it? Some people seem to believe that it applies only to their mouths and not to their ears. It is there to protect not only what you want to say – but more importantly – what you may not want to hear. Keep in mind that the first amendment does not require you to agree with the speaker or even to listen to the speaker, it simply protects the speaker’s right to speak. It is subject to very few exceptions, such as the proverbial “you can’t yell “FIRE” in a crowded theatre,” nor you can use “fighting words” to provoke an incident or incite a riot. Most of us understand that. Unfortunately, today, we are increasingly ruled by liberal elitists and college professors; a tyranny of the minority. The modern-day, politically correct liberals have indeed learned from their communist professors that “he who controls the language controls the message and controls the people.” George Orwell’s famous book “1984” was only a few years ahead of its time. “Thought Police?” Sound familiar? The liberals may be calling it by a different name and deny that “it is what it is,” but what Orwell warned about exists today. In today’s “victim nation/hurt feelings” climate, some people seem to believe that they have a right to say whatever they want, (“Pigs in a blanket, fry ‘em like bacon,” or “What do we want, DEAD COPS, when do want ‘em, NOW”! Geez, what group marched down the streets chanting that little ditty? Hmmmm….) but that speech or opinions they don’t like is labeled as “hate speech” and as such, should be silenced. Worse than that, the person or persons who advocate differing opinions that the politically correct don’t like should be subjected to penalties, punishment, loss of job etc., etc. and have their reputations sullied. Those who advocate such positions are indeed today’s fascists. They usually call themselves “progressives” or “liberals” in order to cover their true agenda. In my office, I keep a prominent, page-one headline from the Bay State Banner dated January 17 th , 2013, celebrating Dr. Martin Luther King’s impact on free speech. The headline contains the following excerpts from NewYork Times v. Sullivan (1964). In that case, JusticeWilliam Brennan (a liberal), writing for the majority, wrote the following: “…debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust and wide- open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials…” Today, the liberal Justice Brennan would be considered a conservative. Certainly, while on-duty in uniform and in the public forum, police, fire, EMTs and military, have to be very careful about what they say, follow orders from superior officers and maintain neutrality on most public issues. And even in one’s private life, opinions – whether written, spoken or electronically conveyed- should be tempered by common sense and avoid extreme positions or language which most people would consider to be racist, sexist,