I was thinking just today. You know there a lot of stories in the news about people not showing respect when they are confronted by police. The situation sometimes escalates. And you never know full story. Maybe it was the person's fault, maybe the police, maybe both. But my question. How is respect for police handled in the US? I know you should never be disrespectful to a cop. But First Amendment issues seem to apply hear. It says in my law dictionary giving a cop the finger is protected free speech. What does the law specifically say? What does the First Amendment say? How does it relate to things like contempt of court and the First Amendment? Also, how do they deal with this topic in other countries, like W. Europe and Canada? I know they say people are much more respectful to law enforcement there. What do their laws and constitution say there? Also, maybe we need just a private campaign here, nationally and in individual cities, of showing more respect to law enforcement. What do you think? Because as I said above, it often makes their job and our lives more difficult. And it escalates every situation.
The cops can be very mean and it doesnt take much for them to be that way!! I think they are sick of everything...and treat people badly for it.....
I'd hate to think what life / society would be like if there were no cops anywhere. Possibly like the situation in Haiti. Total chaos. However , there's nothing worse than bad / rogue / outlaw / criminal authorities with guns and badges that can harm or ruin peoples lives or even end them through lawless actions. It's like everything else in life--it comes down to percentages. A certain percentage will be very bad actors.
Most LEO's like most people are decent but the bad ones are the ones who get the press , a large part of the way a citizen is treated by the police is determined by the behavior of the citizen of course there are exceptions but by and large
What dictionary is that? The Supreme Court says that "fighting words" (probably including giving anybody the finger) is not protected speech. (Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942). Chapinsky called a law enforcement officer "a God damned racketeer and a damned fascist." Justice Murphy, writing for the Court, explained that: "fighting" words neither contributed to the expression of ideas nor possessed any "social value" in the search for truth. "It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." Of course, a finger isn't what we ordinarily think of as speech or words, but the courts consider it "expressive conduct", behavior designed to convey a message, which it regards as the same thing.Expressive Conduct - The Free Speech Center.
If you're not joking, it's the "Law Dictionary" by Steven H. Gifis. It says symbolic speech, like giving a cop an "insulting gesture" (they must mean the finger) is protected. It also says contempt of court is different than free speech because courts have a right to deal with disorder in their chambers. By which I think they mean free speech still applies there, so the rules are a little different.
Giving a cop the finger would be symbolic speech. But that doesn't mean it would necessarily be protected speech under the Chaplinsky doctrine, cuz it could be "fighting words" (even if it isn't "words".) But I researched it and found four cases that held it is protected speech, where LEOs are concerned. Two in the Sixth Circuit: Cruise-Gulyas v. Minard (2019); Wilson v. Martin (2013). One in the Second Circuit: Swarz v. Insogna (2013). And one in the N.C. Supreme Court: Ellis v. Stevens (2020). The courts seem have felt Chaplinsky didn't apply cuz the officers would be more inclined to arrest (which they did) than fight (which they didn't). The Supreme Court has held that LEOs are expected to exercise a higher degree of restraint than the average citizen. The lone act of flipping off an officer per se is apparently not considered fighting words where cops are concerned, since they should be able to exert self-control. But paired with other actions, it could lead to a disorderly conduct charge. Coupled with threatening language or behavior, it could be considered assault. Favata v. Seidel, 511 F. App’x. 155, 159–60 (3d Cir. 2013); State v. Wood, 679 N.E.2d 735, 739–40 (Ohio. Ct. App. 1996); In re S.J.N-K., 647 N.W.2d 707, 711–13 (S.D. 2002). And flipping off a civilian under circumstances in which it could start a fight might also qualify as disorderly conduct.Estes v. State, 660 S.W.2d 873, 874–75 (Tex. App. 1983).
