1. #101
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    Although I don't know how a city A: found out about him working on mowers in his down time, B: Who actually enforced this rule and who actually cared (in the firehouse anyhow).
    Honestly, what department admin. actually makes time to address this "issue?"
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  2. #102
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nine3Probie
    I haven't read the entire thread...just some of the more recent posts. But, from a discussion and some research on a similar issue, I believe the basic guidelines are this (excuse me if I paraphrase...this goes back a couple of years from when I looked into it):

    If your job allows personal reading material (in this case, FHM, Maxim, etc), it cannot restrict ANY personal reading material (including Playboy or the Bible).

    However, your job may restrict all NON-JOB related materials. In this case, you would only be able to read Fire Engineering, Firehouse Magazine, etc. no matter if you're in the bunk room or not, as long as you are "on the clock" and in "their house," as it were.

    Don't know if this helps clarify things...but I hope so.
    A dept. "might" be able to get away with this...and that is a big might. However there are a few downfalls to that policy as well. This would also prohibit any Newspaper...also the Television News and any programs on it would be banned as well as they aren't job related as well. I've been in plenty of firehouses and I can't imagine any of them being locked down like a missle silo bunker with no contact with the outside media, world or prohibiting a member from reading a bible in the evening. Seems a bit extreem to me, considering this really has no effect on the service you recieve if you pull a fire alarm box or call the FD to report a fire.

    I can't understand what the problem is with everyone attempting to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

    It is important to remember that years ago many depts placed small libraries in firehouses and had light duty members cuirculate books similar to library branches around to the different companies as there was no Television or Radios in those days. Today it would seem a bit odd to completely isolate grown adults from the outside world for what I would think to most would be a non issue.

    The firehouse as the court states is a "defacto home" and as such the dept in question and just about every other department I know of, doesn't regulate the members during certain hours of the day(sometimes by past practice others by contract) and that during those times they should be allowed to read any legal document or publication.

    FTM-PTB

  3. #103
    Forum Member
    BCmdepas3280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FTMPTB15
    Honestly, what department admin. actually makes time to address this "issue?"

    You would be suprised.
    IACOJ Membership 2002
    {15}

    Mike IAFF

    The beatings will continue until the morale improves

  4. #104
    Hook & Can

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    376

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    Seems a bit extreem to me, considering this really has no effect on the service you recieve if you pull a fire alarm box or call the FD to report a fire.
    Agreed. That's why I don't think option B (banning EVERYTHING) would/could work...and if tried, would cause more problems than the one it "solved."

  5. #105
    Forum Member
    BCmdepas3280's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Posts
    873

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    Although I don't know how a city A: found out about him working on mowers in his down time, B: Who actually enforced this rule and who actually cared (in the firehouse anyhow). As long as he does his watches, helps with committee work, helps with the meal and does the right thing on runs...I could care less what a brother does during the tour.

    I suppose he might have actually opened up a complete shop in the back and made it much too obvious..I don't know the specifics..but in any case...you don't have a right to do so.

    FTM-PTB
    (A) Jeleous Co worker......(B) The city attorney and we argued that it was a hobby...and it was a very large side bussiness with some brothers taking repair orders
    IACOJ Membership 2002
    {15}

    Mike IAFF

    The beatings will continue until the morale improves

  6. #106
    Truckie
    SPFDRum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 1999
    Location
    St Paul, MN
    Posts
    2,516

    Default

    Honestly, what department admin. actually makes time to address this "issue?"
    Unfortunately ours...
    Our "payday" message just addressed the issue, not involving playboy, but free issues of FMH, Stuff, and Maxim. But completely ignores the grievances, lawsuits, run-amok ot do to his backing of the wrong mayor canidate and only budgeting for 26 companies. Even though we have 27. He even tried to blame sick time on this, which is comical due to the fact we are over a day and a half less than the city average and a day less than the cops.
    All the while, the ops chief concerns himself with counting socks and tee shirts bought with you uniform allowance.
    The HR chief, he is still looking for the office...
    My theroy is that this is an easy issue, especially with the don't offend anyone, especially a protected class mentality of a city. It gives the impression you are cracking down on hostile work place issues and maintaining some type of moral high road.
    This while budget over-runs, aging equipment, station maintenance, equipment maintenance, lack of basic, modern ALS equipment, medic shortages keep on piling up around us. Not to mention no training budget for the fire side of the job. Of course, any of this would take leadership and management.
    OK sorry, rant off.
    My posts reflect my views and opinions, not the organization I work for or my IAFF local. Some of which they may not agree. I.A.C.O.J. member
    "I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
    George Mason
    Co-author of the Second Amendment
    during Virginia's Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
    Elevator Rescue Information

  7. #107
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Somewhere cold in MI
    Posts
    401

    Default

    maybe the guy got hurt. if he broke his hand while working on a mower in the house the department would be required to pay. just an idea.

  8. #108
    Forum Member
    spfdtruckman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    MN
    Posts
    24

    Default New Twist

    O.K Group,
    Lets add a new twist to this discussion.
    How about the Big Johnson t-shirts. Should they be worn in the station? How about in public for that matter. Don't beat me up! It's just a question and a new angle to discuss.

    See example of shirt: http://www.emsshirts.com/f84.htm
    "Firefighters do not regard themselves as heroes because they do what the business requires.Ē

    Chief Edward F. Croker, FDNY

  9. #109
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    465

    Default

    If you want to use constitutional rights to back up your view, then wouldn't just about everything be allowed?

    Next shift I'm taking my nudie mags and strapping my pistol to my belt. And while I'm at it, I am growing a 12" beard, cuz it is my religious right. Nobody shall take away my "rights"!

  10. #110
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spfdtruckman
    O.K Group,
    Lets add a new twist to this discussion.
    How about the Big Johnson t-shirts. Should they be worn in the station? How about in public for that matter. Don't beat me up! It's just a question and a new angle to discuss.

    See example of shirt: http://www.emsshirts.com/f84.htm
    If someone showed up before shift change with a Big Johnson shirt on they'd never hear the end of the ribbing. Obviously they'd have to change out of the shirt before their shift starts, as it is not part of the uniform. As for wearing the shirt in public... if that's their level of class, then it has nothing to do with me. As long as they are not 'formally' representing our department, it's beyond anyone's control what someone wears while they are off-duty.
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  11. #111
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FTMPTB15
    If someone showed up before shift change with a Big Johnson shirt on they'd never hear the end of the ribbing. Obviously they'd have to change out of the shirt before their shift starts, as it is not part of the uniform. As for wearing the shirt in public... if that's their level of class, then it has nothing to do with me. As long as they are not 'formally' representing our department, it's beyond anyone's control what someone wears while they are off-duty.
    But isn't what you wear freedom of expression? So there goes dress codes.

  12. #112
    Forum Member
    HeavyRescueTech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebFire
    I am growing a 12" beard, cuz it is my religious right. Nobody shall take away my "rights"!
    wasn't there a case involving DC fire where a lawsuit said two guys have the right to? and if I'm not mistaken, didn't the court find in their favor (those who were suing for the right to have the beards)?
    If my basic HazMat training has taught me nothing else, it's that if you see a glowing green monkey running away from something, follow that monkey!

    FF/EMT/DBP

  13. #113
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WebFire
    But isn't what you wear freedom of expression? So there goes dress codes.
    If that's the way you see it... then go for it, throw out the dress code.
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  14. #114
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrParasite
    wasn't there a case involving DC fire where a lawsuit said two guys have the right to? and if I'm not mistaken, didn't the court find in their favor (those who were suing for the right to have the beards)?
    Here is an article about the DC Firefighters.
    Quote Originally Posted by News Aritcle
    On August 11, the U.S. District Court extended a preliminary injunction protecting our clients--three Muslim firefighters who wear beards as a matter of religious observance--from being dischared by the D.C. Fire Department, pending a final decision in their case.
    So WebFire, if you can prove it is for religious reasons, you can grow your beard out. But as the article went on to say, "If the firefighters failed fit-testing, they wouldn't be fired.. instead re-assigned to admin. duties."
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  15. #115
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    465

    Default

    Ok, you are failing to see my point (and sarcasm). So have at it. Read your playboys at work. Doesn't really make any difference to me.
    Last edited by WebFire; 07-14-2006 at 06:12 PM.

  16. #116
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    I got your sarcasm, but you can wear a beard and look at whatever magazine you want..

    I don't have time to read any magazine at work, but it is ridiculous that people want to ban certain magazines because of their content. Personally, as long as you 'quietly read' and don't force your opinions on other, I could really care less what you decide to read. It's not my place to worry about that, nor do I care.. but I do think you should have that right.
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  17. #117
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    It was in Federal Court, as I've said time and time again...look it up.
    Johnson v. Los Angeles County Fire Department,
    DC C Calif., CV 93-7589, October 28, 1994.

    "Your Job" can't legally participate in content based censorship, it is illegal in this country, look it up.
    I have not reviewed this case yet, however, this doesnt make all better across the board - it isnt a free pass to bring any and all reading material to your job. If this case was challenged tomorrow it could have a different outcome.



    This has more to do with everyones basic rights than it does just Playboy. It just so happens Playboy was at the crux of this particular case. I feel strongly about all of our inallienable rights gauranteed in the Constitution and I'm not so arrogant to think that I'm above the law or that I don't have to obey the courts of this country and their rulings. Many 1000s of men have fought and died for those rights and here you are ****ing them away...what a proud American you must be!
    Well, I am a proud american and a proud subscriber to playboy. Do not talk to me about men who have died for this country - I can give you a long list of family and friends both recent and not so recent.

    All I am saying is what is so hard to follow rules set by your FD? If Playboy was not allowed is it really that big of a deal? Its 24 hours while your on the clock.

    I value what America Stands for - but come on sometimes people tend to get a little carried away and over zealous about things.

    Everyone has to pick their battles - I just choose not to pick a battle over Playboy.

    The point is...what if I or anyone found the guys possession and reading and practicing of his religion "offensive"? Freedom of religion is also a Constitutional right, correct? So why is it you feel that your employer can ingfringe upon everones freedom of speech but Freedom of religion well that is OK in your eyes?
    Does what you read fall under the freedom of speech? Really? I may have to look over that and get back to you.

    Who died and made you God and King to decide which Inalienable rights we can and can't have during our down time?
    Sigh...ok Fred whatever. You need your Playboy just bring the damn thing with you then. Hell, take with you on calls too so you can read it on the way back to the station.


    The court ruled that the department doesn't have the right to allow or disallow certain material based on its content...so you are the one who needs to get a grip and forget about your book burning fantasies for 24 while you sit there fumming about me reading what I choose during my down time.
    Look, I dont care what anyone reads - all I saying is that I think there is a time and place for everything - IMO work isnt the place for Playboy.


    Your sense of entitlement is unreal. "Your time"...as if you own every municial worker as your own personal slave! Newsflash buddy just because you are paying for my salary doesn't mean I'm at your every beck and call. As long as the local Engine Company shows up when I have a fire...I could give two-sh*ts as to what they are doing before or after the run...same goes with the cops or teachers or whomever. I have many more problems to worry about in my life than what someone else is doing during their down time at the firehouse.
    Well I guess you should tell that to the Marana, AZ LEO and the Sgt who were fired fro having porn on the lap tops in the patrol car along with Playboy type magazines. I imagine if they tried to fight it they would lose - even if the cite the case you mentioned as precedent.

    I personally dont find it very proffesional at all. That may be why you and I have such a hard time seeing eye to eye.



    How are they going to have access to it? What happens if you get a run? Do you leave a guy behind? Isn't that the job of the local hospitals to handle that? Basicly No...just because they pay for it doesn't mean they are allowed use of it. Our Dept regulations state no Civilians are allowed past Housewatch...so therefore they never make it into the kitchen anyhow.
    Maybe the folks ought to sue your department for you taking away their inalienable rights to use your stove.
    Last edited by SSTONER; 07-21-2006 at 06:36 AM.
    Warm Regards,
    Shawn Stoner
    EMT-B

  18. #118
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SSTONER
    I have not reviewed this case yet, however, this doesnt make all better across the board - it isnt a free pass to bring any and all reading material to your job. If this case was challenged tomorrow it could have a different outcome.
    Correct, however it wasn't and it hasn't been. Just like slavery was legal at one time and now it isn't...it still doesn't change the fact that this case was decided the way it was.

    All I am saying is what is so hard to follow rules set by your FD? If Playboy was not allowed is it really that big of a deal? Its 24 hours while your on the clock.
    If they ban certain reading materials based on their content then their rules are illegal in this country...what part of that did you miss?

    Does what you read fall under the freedom of speech? Really? I may have to look over that and get back to you.
    Yes it does. It protects speech and also the access to it...look it up and educate yourself



    Sigh...ok Fred whatever. You need your Playboy just bring the damn thing with you then. Hell, take with you on calls too so you can read it on the way back to the station.
    Another mischaracterization...it is about quiet possession, reading and consentual sharing of whatever one wants to read as an American citizen...not taking Playboy on runs.

    Look, I dont care what anyone reads - all I saying is that I think there is a time and place for everything - IMO work isnt the place for Playboy.
    One problem, our work is also a defacto home. Big difference between us and other work places.


    Well I guess you should tell that to the Marana, AZ LEO and the Sgt who were fired fro having porn on the lap tops in the patrol car along with Playboy type magazines. I imagine if they tried to fight it they would lose - even if the cite the case you mentioned as precedent.

    I personally dont find it very proffesional at all. That may be why you and I have such a hard time seeing eye to eye.
    I could give two sh*ts what the officers were doing in their car or what they had on their computers...as long as when I call for a robbery in progress, they show up ASAP...I don't care what they were doing before or after. Bigger problems in this world than a couple of cops looking at porn.

    Furthermore...this case deals with firemen in a firehouse which as I mentioned the court found to be a "defacto home"...police officers don't work 24 hours, don't have the same situations and circumstances as we do. Although I wouldn't have cared....the above court case has nothing to do with their situtation and wouldn't apply to them in all likelyhood.

    Maybe the folks ought to sue your department for you taking away their inalienable rights to use your stove.
    If it is in the Constitution...they are more than welcome to sue.

    FTM-PTB

  19. #119
    Forum Member
    HeavyRescueTech's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    ok, Fred, I'll bite in on this again. Can a FDNY officer, who is officer of an engine or truck company in the south bronx, who has black FFs working on his crew, lie on the couch in the crew lounge reading a book titled "8 ways to hang a N****r"? or "An introduction to cross burning"?

    or can a black officer in a hispanic neighborhood with hispanic crew read a book titled "S****s are only good for washing dishes and cheap labor"?

    or any of the dozen or so racist magazines regularly published by any of the other "my race is better than your race" groups in the US?

    yeah, it's not porn, and it's offensive for different reasons, but it is the content that is objectionable. and do you think this type of material is suitable for the public workplace?
    If my basic HazMat training has taught me nothing else, it's that if you see a glowing green monkey running away from something, follow that monkey!

    FF/EMT/DBP

  20. #120
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    Correct, however it wasn't and it hasn't been. Just like slavery was legal at one time and now it isn't...it still doesn't change the fact that this case was decided the way it was.
    Sure I can see the Parallels with Playboy and slavery.



    If they ban certain reading materials based on their content then their rules are illegal in this country...what part of that did you miss?
    Well, Infact some magazines are banned from some departments here. So, either they did that without consulting any legal representaive from that municipality and nobody has been smart enough to fight it OR that Department has consulted thier attorney and has the legal ducks lined up.

    Your guess is as good as mine.



    Yes it does. It protects speech and also the access to it...look it up and educate yourself.
    Thanks Fred, I ll do that





    Another mischaracterization...it is about quiet possession, reading and consentual sharing of whatever one wants to read as an American citizen...not taking Playboy on runs.
    Whats the difference if you quitely sit on your bunk reading it or in the back of your Engine? Maybe that with one the public could see you?

    You used the word consentual...that implies everyone is up for it.



    One problem, our work is also a defacto home. Big difference between us and other work places.
    The nice thing about this country is that we do not have to agree with what the courts say. Ya you stay there for yourshift which happens to be over night - to me thats work no matter how you cut it.

    Home is where I can run around in my under wear all day if I choose drinking a beer shooting javelina fronm my poarch.




    give two sh*ts what the officers were doing in their car or what they had on their computers...
    Yes, I can see that. I would hope that most can see the obvious problems with this.


    as when I call for a robbery in progress, they show up ASAP
    Sure right after they close the web browser and tuck the magazine away.

    don't care what they were doing before or after. Bigger problems in this world than a couple of cops looking at porn.
    Amazing.

    Furthermore...this case deals with firemen in a firehouse which as I mentioned the court found to be a "defacto home"...police officers don't work 24 hours, don't have the same situations and circumstances as we do.
    So FF's and the Firehouse are just special.


    Although I wouldn't have cared....the above court case has nothing to do with their situtation and wouldn't apply to them in all likelyhood.
    Well, you said that would make it illegal..so I am sure it would apply - illegal is illegal- its not profession dependant if we are talking about inalienable rights.


    FTM-PTB[/QUOTE]
    Warm Regards,
    Shawn Stoner
    EMT-B

  21. #121
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    959

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SSTONER
    Well I guess you should tell that to the Marana, AZ LEO and the Sgt who were fired fro having porn on the lap tops in the patrol car along with Playboy type magazines. I imagine if they tried to fight it they would lose - even if the cite the case you mentioned as precedent.
    First, as stated earlier, it is on a department owned laptop. That has nothing to do with reading a personally owned magazine. The fact that it is a department owned computer is reason enough to fire the employee, regardless of the content. If those officers were discovered to be looking up other material considered 'illegal' in the city's IT Policy, then I'm sure they would have been disciplined for that too.

    Again, folks, this isn't just an issue about Playboy. That simply just happens to be what started this discussion. It's much broader than Playboy or porn.
    Do it because you love it, not because you love being seen doing it.

  22. #122
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SSTONER
    Sure I can see the Parallels with Playboy and slavery.
    It is the parallel with the nature of law and courts...it is always evolving and changing...right now it is the law of the land...someday it might change or this case could be reinforced by further rulings of a similar nature...only time will tell. Am I having a discussion with an adult or an adolecent incapable of understanding the context of simple comparisons?

    Well, Infact some magazines are banned from some departments here. So, either they did that without consulting any legal representaive from that municipality and nobody has been smart enough to fight it OR that Department has consulted thier attorney and has the legal ducks lined up.

    Your guess is as good as mine.
    I'll put money on the quack city attourneys never recieved a letter from the ACLU threatening to take them to court over this...I worked for a city that at one time did the same thing and once they reviewed the case law that the ACLU cited...they had the Cheif quickly remove his rule. Until that point they were unaware of the legal nature of their policy.

    Thanks Fred, I ll do that
    Hey you asked the question with a sarcastic tone and obviously thought for a second that you might be correct in thinking free speech only refers to actuall speech and not the access to it as well. That is a long standing legal principal in this country...and as I've said many times in this thread...read and understand the law and you would see that your arguments have all been raised before the court before. It's not my fault you are attempting to argue about a court case and its effects that you've never reviewed before.

    Whats the difference if you quitely sit on your bunk reading it or in the back of your Engine? Maybe that with one the public could see you?
    When you are in the Engine...you are in what the courts would term regulated time..as opposed to the unregulated time in the firehouse.

    You used the word consentual...that implies everyone is up for it.
    And I also used the word "sharing", which means if you are to share the material with someone else they have to agree to want to see it and read it. That doesn't mean if you disagree with my reading of a certain book, you have a veto...read the damn case and stop picking out words and using them in your convoluted reasonings...you took the word "consentual" out of context.

    The nice thing about this country is that we do not have to agree with what the courts say. Ya you stay there for yourshift which happens to be over night - to me thats work no matter how you cut it.
    You are correct...you don't have to agree with it...but you must abide by it. It is the law. You are right...it is work...nowhere in the court case was this refuted or contested...however your interpretation doesn't matter as the court of law has ruled on it and the firehouse is a "defacto home."


    Yes, I can see that. I would hope that most can see the obvious problems with this.

    Amazing

    So FF's and the Firehouse are just special.
    What is amazing? What joke of a world do you live in where this is an important part of your day worring about the down time of police officers? Maybe you live in Mayberry RFD and there are no other problems to worry about other than what is Barney Fife up to...but not here.

    According to this courts ruling which is the only one that deals specifically with this issue under these circumstances. So yes, if you'd read the case...you'd already know the answer to that question.

    Well, you said that would make it illegal..so I am sure it would apply - illegal is illegal- its not profession dependant if we are talking about inalienable rights.
    There are issues delt with in regards to the nature of the firehouse and the work schedual that make this job signifigantly different than other jobs and how during your time an employer can't regulate only specific parts of ones behaivor when virtually nothing else is based on the content of what that person is doing.

    Look it up...most if not all of your questions will be answered.

    FTM-PTB
    Last edited by FFFRED; 07-22-2006 at 10:44 AM.

  23. #123
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Here, There, Everywhere
    Posts
    4,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DrParasite
    ok, Fred, I'll bite in on this again. Can a FDNY officer, who is officer of an engine or truck company in the south bronx, who has black FFs working on his crew, lie on the couch in the crew lounge reading a book titled "8 ways to hang a N****r"? or "An introduction to cross burning"?

    or can a black officer in a hispanic neighborhood with hispanic crew read a book titled "S****s are only good for washing dishes and cheap labor"?

    or any of the dozen or so racist magazines regularly published by any of the other "my race is better than your race" groups in the US?

    yeah, it's not porn, and it's offensive for different reasons, but it is the content that is objectionable. and do you think this type of material is suitable for the public workplace?
    Dr,

    Is the speech, protected under the 1st Amdendment?...not all speech is as the courts called it.. "of public concern". Some Hate speech isn't protected. That would be a large part of determining the answer to your question.

    If the material is defined as "fighting words"...then it probably won't be protected.

    Also as the courts have already determined...the firehouse isn't a "public workplace" It isn't public domain, as a public park...or whatever you want to compare it to as we not only "work" there but we live there as well...and that is a large part of what makes our "workplace" different than most other peoples.

    If the speech is protected under the 1st Amendment...then it would share in the protections of Playboy, the NYTimes, Catcher in the Rye...etc. Therein lies the answer to your question.

    FTM-PTB

    PS-Officers don't sit in the "crew lounge" typically as they have their own offices, bunks, TVs...etc.
    Last edited by FFFRED; 07-22-2006 at 11:16 AM.

  24. #124
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    61

    Default

    So, I guess it boils down to is this: If it is my right, does that make it correct? I have the right to bare arms and when I lived in AZ I used to carry a sidearm with me on regular occasion. But never at work! Even if it is my "defacto home". Nor would I want to see my firefighters with weapons at work. Would one dream of strapping on a pistol on their down time just because it is their right? I also have the right to run around nekkid at home, but not in my "defacto home", as it might be considered offensive to others. In fact, I suspended a member who insisted on going just about anywhere in the station "au natural". Other firefighters complained, and after warnings, he got to be nekkid for a couple of shifts away from work.

    Many years ago the military stopped selling adult-themed magazines on their bases. Playboy objected on the grounds of their articles were of true literary value-Playboy won and is now sold on bases while other, harder magazines are not! All of this, even though the other, more explicit magazines might also have literary value and are perfectly legal to own. Still, as pretty as the air-brushed ladies are, I feel the magazine has no place in any "common" area of a fire station. Not just where the public might go, but where it is assumed that more than one person could occupy the space.

    Personally, if one of my firefighters had reading material (or movies or whatever) in their own bunkroom and not out where ANYONE else might take offense, then so be it. No one else would see it and therefore no one else would be offended. But if it was in the dayroom, kitchen, bathroom, etc. and even ONE person complained then it could/would be treated as a sexual harassment or a hostile workplace complaint and dealt with accordingly. But, it might be different for me since I work for the federal govt. and complaints of this nature are taken extremely serious. So, policy here is "out of sight, out of mind". In an individual bunkroom, a locker, a gym bag, .... just not out for anyone else to see.

  25. #125
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FFFRED
    It is the parallel with the nature of law and courts...it is always evolving and changing...right now it is the law of the land...someday it might change or this case could be reinforced by further rulings of a similar nature...only time will tell. Am I having a discussion with an adult or an adolecent incapable of understanding the context of simple comparisons?
    Well, since you asked I am 35. As you stated thia case could change one way or another, afterall its over 10 yrs old. A lot has changed since then.


    I'll put money on the quack city attourneys never recieved a letter from the ACLU threatening to take them to court over this...I worked for a city that at one time did the same thing and once they reviewed the case law that the ACLU cited...they had the Cheif quickly remove his rule. Until that point they were unaware of the legal nature of their policy.
    I have never been a fan of the ACLU - I will leave it at that.


    Hey you asked the question with a sarcastic tone and obviously thought for a second that you might be correct in thinking free speech only refers to actuall speech and not the access to it as well. That is a long standing legal principal in this country...and as I've said many times in this thread...read and understand the law and you would see that your arguments have all been raised before the court before. It's not my fault you are attempting to argue about a court case and its effects that you've never reviewed before.
    I have not had a chance to review it - I cant from work as they only allow this site and internal sites through the firewall. I may try on my 3 day weekend from home.



    When you are in the Engine...you are in what the courts would term regulated time..as opposed to the unregulated time in the firehouse.
    Seems that in the firehouse would be regulated also - you cant have hookers come over and visit you in your bunk. Where you could in your home....well I couldnt..my wife would never go for it.


    And I also used the word "sharing", which means if you are to share the material with someone else they have to agree to want to see it and read it. That doesn't mean if you disagree with my reading of a certain book, you have a veto...read the damn case and stop picking out words and using them in your convoluted reasonings...you took the word "consentual" out of context.
    You used the word consentual - I can only interreupt what you say based on what the word means - which is to give approval or be in approval of something proposed by someone else. "agreement".



    What is amazing? What joke of a world do you live in where this is an important part of your day worring about the down time of police officers? Maybe you live in Mayberry RFD and there are no other problems to worry about other than what is Barney Fife up to...but not here.
    Well, I dont wake up everyday worried about it, however, here in Tucson Mayberry we have an excellent PD, so does Marana(marana use to be a mayberry type town years ago..but now runs right up borders tucson).

    I have worked LE and the Fire Service - As a LEO, I would not want my partner reading his Playboy or hustler at work in the squad car - the truth be told anyone who cant have enought comkon sense to leave it at home probably is not a good cop either.

    Does reading Playboy make you a bad FF? Probably not. Its the thought process behind the whole thing that I am not good with.

    Things of this nature make you wander where the courts priority is - and if you say protecting the First admendmant - I am not so sure.

    Are your stations computers limited to what you can view?


    Again its only one court - so its ceratinly not the majority.


    To put it simply, regardless of my rights or any case rulings...I will leave my Playboy at home.
    Last edited by SSTONER; 07-23-2006 at 04:50 AM.
    Warm Regards,
    Shawn Stoner
    EMT-B

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Fire in our firehouse...
    By 911brad in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 11-03-2004, 04:32 PM
  2. Will Bronx firehouse close?
    By FFFRED in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-03-2004, 10:00 AM
  3. Cleanest Vol. Firehouse Kitchen Awards
    By NJFFSA16 in forum The Off Duty Forums
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-27-2003, 01:38 PM
  4. Atlantic County Firehouse up in Flames!
    By mdoddsjffhnfc in forum Firefighters Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-05-2003, 11:15 AM
  5. Atlantic County Firehouse destroyed
    By mdoddsjffhnfc in forum Fire Wire
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-05-2003, 10:37 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register