Racist tweet by Springfield police officer Conrad Larivier
Multiple sources confirm that Springfield police officer Conrad Lariviere offered this comment about this weekend’s domestic terrorist attack in Charlottesville, VA.
Hahahaha love this, maybe people shouldn’t block road ways
I don’t want to hear ANY excuses or rationalizations — this racist thug needs to be fired RIGHT NOW.
Please share widely!
I recommend deep breaths.
You want a guy fired over two sentences, knowing nothing else about him?
I know all I need to know.
How do you plan to excuse him? I’m curious about how you think this hateful public outburst is OK.
It’s called the First Amendment.
Let’s say you’re right, and he’s a racist. You’re not supposed to be fired for being a racist in this country.
Maybe this guy has 20 years of service. Maybe he’s the best cop in town, and a pillar of the community. You have no idea. Innocent until proven guilty. This may be the resistance but it’s not the French Revolution.
I didn’t expect to disagree with this post but JimC has a point. I called Mayor Walsh a thug for firing a protester who blocked a road. And I called him a thug the second time for not firing a cop who was caught on video beating up a pedestrian.
So instead of all pretending that we’re on The Apprentice, let’s look at this guy’s record. Review all the arrests he has made or even the tickets he has written. Is there a connection between his attitude and his actions? Most likely there is. Unless this cop has a superhuman power to compartmentalize, there will be a lot to remedy. Just firing him now is literally too good for him.
Sure. Just like the wife-beater and child-abuser shouldn’t be prosecuted because he’s done so many wonderful things for the community.
This guy is a COP. He signs the same agreement that teachers sign regarding his public behavior and speech.
He posted an offensive comment on a public site LONG after the perpetrators Nazi rants were public knowledge.
I don’t care how many years of service he has. I don’t know what “the best cop in town” even MEANS in this context.
What we KNOW, and knew when this comment was posted, is at a pro-Nazi extremist DROVE A CAR INTO A CROWD, killing and injuring as many people as he could — and Mr. Larivier APPLAUDED the act.
No “good cop” does that.
His comments are inappropriate, likely wrong (I only know what you say, not the larger context), and probably a violation of the department’s stated policies.
If we assume he has no other offenses, I would support a suspension. Firing a guy for saying something offensive is too much. (Ever been unemployed for a long stretch? I have. I don’t wish it on people.)
But more importantly, it’s social media. It’s supposed to be an area of free expression. Was it an official post in his capacity as a cop, or was it a private post made during his own time? That’s relevant too.
Suppose you’re a teacher, and you make a post on social media promoting — say — sex between teachers and under-aged students. I think you’re fired. Immediately. It doesn’t matter whether it’s a “private” post or not. When you’re a cop, you’re a cop around the clock. If you commit a crime while off duty, you’re still fired.
We, correctly, have a zero-tolerance policy towards sex abuse by public school teachers.
I believe that we MUST have an analogous zero-tolerance policy towards hate-speech by police officers.
These analogies don’t work because they involve children.
I think we can assume that many cops applauded when the highway protestors were arrested last year (the Boston protest). But let’s say some others applauded the protesters themselves. You would, I assume, have a problem with the latter group of cops being fired?
By calling for this guy to go, you’re imposing a social test I’m not comfortable with. Obviously we don’t want racist cops — but we can’t police their beliefs, either.
I’d rather err on the side of speech tolerance, and judge this guy by his entire record, whatever that record is.
I think protecting societies from violent Nazi extremists is just as necessary and important as protecting children.
None of the protesters last year were killed by right-wing extremists driving through them at high speed.
You are defending the indefensible.
Yes, I am.
What of it? Do you want to repeal the First Amendment?
This isn’t a first amendment issue.
He’s applauding the killing of at least one and maiming of more than a dozen innocents who, in fact, WERE exercising their first amendment rights. He’s defending a Nazi extremist who perpetrated this terrorist attack.
The first amendment doesn’t apply to yelling “fire” in a crowded theater. A Springfield cop posting these comments is doing just that.
Do you know the context of the “yelling fire” ruling? It might interest you.
@ yelling fire: Indeed. And are you arguing that this expression does not qualify?
A police officer promoted driving a car into a crowd? Are you arguing that that isn’t a crime? We’re in an environment where such terrorist events are happening around the world with increasing frequency — are you saying this doesn’t meet the “clear and present danger” test?
Sorry. I am unconvinced. Not only am I unconvinced, I think each argument you make weakens whatever your original case was.
Yes, I’m arguing that it’s a form of speech, and therefore not a crime.
You don’t have to be convinced; a judge (or a police chief) may say I’m wrong. But as I read the First Amendment, it protects the worst forms of speech, because that’s the only way to protect the best forms of speech.
Well, here’s how I suggest that this should be tested: Fire Mr. Larivier. Let him bring a first-amendment lawsuit. Let’s see how far he gets.
I’m not suggesting that he be prosecuted (yet), I’m suggesting that he be fired. There is a difference.
I’m a strong believer in the First Amendment. Cops are special, have special privileges, and have special obligations. Mr. Larivier is, I assume, issued a firearm like every other police officer and given ENORMOUS latitude in how and whether he uses it (also like every other police officer). A similarly enormous weight is placed on his judgement in exercising that latitude.
Were Mr. Scaramucci’s First Amendment rights violated by his being fired because of his obscenity-laced tirade during an on-the-record interview? I don’t think so.
I think you’re making excuses for an out-of-control cop.
If you’re a cop working for the city of Springfield, then publicly voicing racist comments OUGHT to get you fired.
Unless, of course, you don’t give a shit how the black residents of Springfield feel about their police department.
Every single arrest this officer has been connected to is now tainted.
Tainted arrests are an SPD specialty.
They had a detective who threaten to plant evidence on a suspect. The suspect was in another jurisdiction and on camera. Guess what happened to a lot of that guy’s arrests?
http://www.masslive.com/news/index.ssf/2016/12/another_drug_tarfficking_case.html
Springfield Mass Police Facebook
Springfield Mass Police Twitter
JimC, feel free to leave messages of support.
This is either too cryptic or too sarcastic for me, MP. What’s your point?
MP, would you fire any cop who likes this cop on facebook?
Any who liked that comment? Any who ‘friended’ him after he posted it? Yes. Fuck them all.
Just cops? How about teachers? Firefighters? Tenured professors?
Teachers, firefighters, and tenured professors are not issued lethal weapons and given essentially carte-blanche to do what they choose with them.
Cops are different.
That’s logical, at least. But I’m not sure many people would be satisfied with the result, with racist teaches posting with impunity while a cop who “liked” the teacher’s post being fired.
Reporting on the Springfield PD’s Nazi sympathizer in today’s Charlotte Observer here.
I’m Facebook friends or friends of friends with a lot of Cambridge, Chicago and Boston cops, and we’d fire half the department if we fired them over comments like this. The deputy chief in Chelsea took a paid ba action day to run around the city in his truck with a Trump sign-not a pretty site to the majority Latino and majorit undocumented community there. He got docked for it and got demoted, but he’s still there.
I am not suggesting that justifies them or makes them right, I am saying firing one bad egg for a social media comment does nothing to change the culture of these departments. We need too to bottom police reform on a national basis to cut out the hero complex and the racial attitudes that are pervasive with law enforcement. We frankly need to do more to recruit cops who went to college and have diverse cultural backgrounds or exposure to those backgrounds. We need more Harvard grads and fewer washed out ex military.
It’s got to be a top to bottom reform.
We’re not talking about driving around with a Trump sign. We’re not talking about some abstract “social media comment”.
We’re talking about a cop who applauded a Nazi extremist who DROVE HIS CAR THROUGH A CROWD.
I agree that we need top-to-bottom reform.
I think that firing ANY cop who publishes a comment like this is a good start.
A community that is serious about stopping police brutality doesn’t tolerate this. At. All.
Since we’re talking about a cop I agree with Tom. All members of a community need to be confident that police officers will protect them and not condone extra-legal methods. If we were discussing a private employer firing someone for expressing political views on their own time, I would not be comfortable with that.
I am comfortable with both, as both are legally permissible. I am arguing that targeting one racist cop for firing will do next to nothing to solve the much wider issue of racist policing in America. We need a top to bottom reform an a brand new recruitment chain focusing on community leaders, not meatheads looking for an easy pension and/or the chance to beat up a minority.
No argument about top-to-bottom reform.
I think that firing Sgt James Crowley would have had a greater impact than the “beer summit”. I think that, as we’ve learned so many other times, the result of these “investigations” and “top to bottom reforms” is — inevitably — exoneration and white-washing of rogue cops that brutalize and terrorize their victims.
The drumbeat continues. Rogue and brutal cops terrorize our cities and are exonerated.
It’s not going to stop until we DEMAND that it stop. NOW. Not someday. Not after yet another reform that nobody in power wants.
This guy needs to be off the street. NOW.
SHOULD employers generally be allowed to legally discriminate on the basis of political viewpoint? I would argue emphatically no. It is the most abhorrent views that test our commitment to free speech not just as a constitutional right, but an ethical principle and I subscribe to Voltaire’s attributed claim that he would defend to the death your right to say it. Or there is Andrew Shepherd’s speech.
Your standard is so lax that a shopkeeper who inadvertently hired a bigot would be unable to fire him when he drove away all her customers. That seems to swing too far in the other direction. Free speech has never extended to the work place and it shouldn’t since it can undermine professionalism, as these remarks clearly do. But Tom swings too far toward a zero tolerance policy that violates due process and hard fought labor protections.
I think on balance we need to design better programs to train police officers not to be racist, and I certainly think this officer should be disciplined and probably fired. Since it’s highly likely he has some bad actions that go along with his bad speech. But a zero tolerance policy or an anything goes policy strike me as counter productive in the long run and for the scope of such a large department.
If the employee is doing or saying something on company time which is affecting the business or contrary to professionalism it should be OK the terminate, but if the employee can manage to keep his bigotry to himself while at work then he should be able to work. I may be sensitive to this because my work environments have to be politics-free and I do a good job keeping it that way, but I of course engage in political activity known in my community and it would not be right for a Republican employer to fire me for being a Democrat. I understand that it’s obvious to us we are referring to extreme views in this case, but if there are more people like Trump who think it’s all equivalent I can easily imagine someone firing someone for this reason.
I think this question (“SHOULD employers generally be allowed to legally discriminate on the basis of political viewpoint?”) is a different topic that perhaps deserves its own thread.
The issue here is a crudely offensive comment by Conrad Lariviere — an active cop in a Massachusetts city.
I’m sorry to say I cannot
stick up for the Springfield Police Department, which is has and had issues with racism for decades.
However, Lariviere deserves due process like anyone else. I’d like to see him fired, but even assholes have rights.
You also misspelled his name in the headilne.
The implication of firing public employees, without due process, for their political views would be wide ranging for other professions. I am thinking of our own most of all. I would not deny any worker their right to fair arbitration and due process. I do think the comments, even if isolated, are grounds for a full top to bottom personnel review for this individual and the entire department.
Political views?
I encourage you to re-read the tweet image in the thread-starter. Those aren’t “political views”. Those are vile and vicious attacks.
I was not arguing they weren’t-I am saying we should all be careful what we wish for when it comes to giving bosses and governments more power to fire and censor-eventually the wheel will spin back against people who aren’t as blatantly immoral as the individual in question.
The time for slippery-slope arguments is, in my opinion, gone.
We have already slid down the slope into the abyss of out-of-control government. We already have legions of out-of-control cops who murder, brutalize, and abuse people — especially people of color — without punishment.
We already have a president who encourages police brutality.
I invite you to offer a scenario where a police officer celebrating an act like this is something we want to tolerate.
And you’re inviting that out of control government to censor and fire over political viewpoints. Maybe Obama and Lynch could implement the policy you want-not Trump and Sessions. And certainly not any of the criminals running Springfield.
I’m sure the SPD has some good cops, but the amount of racism, malfeasance, and protection they receive from the department and city is disgusting.
Thanks for the heads-up, I corrected it.
I think that, at a minimum, he should be suspended without pay starting right now.
This is an egregious act that Mr. Lariviere doesn’t deny. He has no business carrying a lethal weapon, especially in minority communities.
Is carrying a firearm really where you draw the line? What if he were a high school teacher teaching your kid?
Such counterfactuals and speculation are just more ways to distract what has to happen.
We KNOW what he did. He doesn’t deny it. He does carry a lethal weapon. He carries a lethal weapon in a city which multiple sources agree “has and had issues with racism for decades”.
He has no business on the street. So priority one is get him OFF the street.
I think the right answer is to fire him, and let him sue if he doesn’t like it. Failing that, suspend him without pay.
So I guess my short answer is yes, carrying a firearm really IS where I draw this line.
When we have a video of a brutal vicious attack by a white teacher against a minority student, then perhaps we can revisit your speculated alternative scenario.
It’s not my “speculated alternative scenario”. It’s yours.
Here’s what you posted 19 hours ago:
“Suppose you’re a teacher, and you make a post on social media promoting — say — sex between teachers and under-aged students..” . .
I didn’t realize you were referencing that.
I’m pretty sure that in that scenario, the teacher would at least be immediate suspended without pay the moment that authorship of the comment(s) confirmed.
I think that we do take extreme steps to protect our children. I think we should do the same to protect ourselves from out-of-control cops.
Well, this thread is just a mess. You’ve argued that cops that post hateful speech on facebook should be treated the same as teachers who approve of sex with minors. Then you argued that cops should be treated differently. Then you argued that they should be treated the same as teachers who physically beat up their students.
You come up with a counterfactual about teachers then suggest that counterfactuals only distract us from the real issues.
JimC’s suggestion that we take a few deep breaths should have been heeded.
My argument is simple, no matter how hard you try to confuse it.
Conrad Larivier should be taking off the street as soon as possible. I would fire him and let him bring whatever legal action he chooses. Others have suggested some sort of suspension.
There’s nothing confusing about this. Fire him.
We generally take a much tougher line against brutal teachers. Consider:
– Florida teacher Dru Dehartwas fired after she ordered older students to beat up a seventh grader
– Georgia special needs teacher Karolynn Amelia Stripling was charged with felony child assault after a video of her knocking over a 2 year old was published. She resigned the next day.
– Texas teacher Mary Hastings was fired after cellphone video showing her attack on a student went viral.
I suggest that we need to draw the same hard line with brutal cops — and we don’t. Not by a long shot.
” None are so helplessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free.” RASHID SHAQ
This proposed course of action is unassailable in my view and a no brainer.