[Zeeb]

This is a hard one. On one hand, I definately don't want a state trooper on duty who is in the KKK but on the other I don't its right for someone to be fired for their opinions and affiliations while off duty. Though I have to say I think he needs to be fired--but is there a legal basis for that?

CNN.com - State fights to fire trooper tied to Klan - Aug 26, 2006

[Dakar]

Unless they can demonstrate he lets it interfere with his job, I think they're screwed.

[OreoCookie]

Not sure, but in Germany, state employees may not be a member of certain organizations, in particular terrorist organizations. So if the KKK is considered a terrorist organization (or a forbidden organization), then this might have a legal basis at least where I come from (we have to sign that we are not members of [long list of organizations]).

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Not sure, but in Germany, state employees may not be a member of certain organizations, in particular terrorist organizations. So if the KKK is considered a terrorist organization (or a forbidden organization), then this might have a legal basis at least where I come from (we have to sign that we are not members of [long list of organizations]).

We had a similar thing a few years back with a couple of BNP members being kicked out of the police force.

I'm not sure how that sits with the EU Human Rights Charter.

Originally Posted by Article 12.1

Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association at all levels, in particular in political, trade union and civic matters, which implies the right of everyone to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his or her interests.

[OreoCookie]

The EU human rights chapter says nothing about organizations that have been forbidden by the state for one reason or another (e. g. the communist party, certain Nazi organizations or terrorist organizations). It has nothing to do with the EU, so stop dragging out this dead horse you are beating on.

We are talking about organizations with criminal background, for instance, and you have to sign that you are not a member. By giving away your affiliations to a certain group, your chances decrease significantly (depending on the specific organization and the job), but you are not automatically excluded either.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

The EU human rights chapter says nothing about organizations that have been forbidden by the state for one reason or another (e. g. the communist party, certain Nazi organizations or terrorist organizations). It has nothing to do with the EU, so stop dragging out this dead horse you are beating on.

I wasn't dragging the dead horse out. I was pointing out facts relating to the UK case I mentioned. Possibly these facts could be related to the events you mention in Germany, since I believe Germany is also a signatory to the Charter? Is it actually legal for our countries to ban non-violent organisations when we're signed to a charter which guarantees freedom of association?

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

We are talking about organizations with criminal background, for instance, and you have to sign that you are not a member.

So, at what point does the organisation become criminal? At what point do the actions of the individuals cease to be counted as individual actions and start to become group action?
Does the KKK have a criminal background, or does some small percentage of members of the KKK have a criminal background?

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Doofy

I wasn't dragging the dead horse out. I was pointing out facts relating to the UK case I mentioned. Possibly these facts could be related to the events you mention in Germany, since I believe Germany is also a signatory to the Charter? Is it actually legal for our countries to ban non-violent organisations when we're signed to a charter which guarantees freedom of association?

You clearly don't understand. You don't get fired for belonging to a particular organization, but for making false statements to get employed in the first place.

Nobody said anything about non-violent here. Most of the organizations which are forbidden in Germany are violent, others are part of organized crime even.

Originally Posted by Doofy

So, at what point does the organisation become criminal? At what point do the actions of the individuals cease to be counted as individual actions and start to become group action?
Does the KKK have a criminal background, or does some small percentage of members of the KKK have a criminal background?

The state determines which organization is considered criminal/forbidden. They ultimately make the decision whether the crimes committed by members are supported and organized by that organization or not. (If the KKK have a gathering and burn a black man on the cross together, then this is obviously different from a KKK member robbing a bank -- here the membership doesn't have anything to do with the crime) If you are a member of such an organization, you have to tick the appropriate checkbox when you apply for employment. If you lie here, they can fire you right away for making false statements to become an employee. If you don't lie, they will probably not hire you.

The same goes for terrorist organizations. I hope no explanation is necessary here, if you are affiliated to Al Quaida, then I don't think it's a good idea for the German (or any) state to employ them.

The individual is also protected to the fullest extent by the law: the state/prosecution have to prove that you are a member of that particular group.

[turtle777]

Fire him.

If he is an active KKK member, he has a reason which is most likely incompatible with him being an officer. If he doesn't agree with the KKKs past, why would he even be a member today ?

-t

[Zeeb]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

Fire him.

If he is an active KKK member, he has a reason which is most likely incompatible with him being an officer. If he doesn't agree with the KKKs past, why would he even be a member today ?

-t

I agree he should be fired and I want him fired. The only angle I can think of is something called a "bona fide occupational qualification" that maybe could apply. That makes it legal to fire someone or not hire someone for otherwise illegal reasons. For instance, a Catholic priest has to be Catholic. It's illegal not to hire someone for that reason in any other instance, except in that case. You can also choose to only hire asian people to work in a Chinese restaurant.

I think police officers should be required to not be members of hate groups.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

You clearly don't understand. You don't get fired for belonging to a particular organization, but for making false statements to get employed in the first place.

No, you clearly don't understand. The BNP/police example I mentioned was "fired for belonging to a particular organisation". The government changed its mind on what was allowed and subsequently fired folks. And instances like this, where the government starts firing people for belonging to political organisations which don't agree with them is a slippery, slippery slope.

[TETENAL]

If the BNP is not a forbidden organization, then nobody should be fired for being a member.

OreoCookie was talking about forbidden organizations. In Germany a political party can be forbidden if it is hostile towards the constitution. Obviously someone who belongs to a party that wants to abolish a democratic Germany can not work for that state.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by Doofy

And instances like this, where the government starts firing people for belonging to political organisations which don't agree with them is a slippery, slippery slope.

I agree, it is a slippery slope.

But the question is also: is the current KKK considered a political organization ?

-t

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Doofy

No, you clearly don't understand. The BNP/police example I mentioned was "fired for belonging to a particular organisation". The government changed its mind on what was allowed and subsequently fired folks. And instances like this, where the government starts firing people for belonging to political organisations which don't agree with them is a slippery, slippery slope.

I was talking about my government (not yours) and from my experience (I'm currently employed by the state as a researcher).

In Germany, this strategy wouldn't work: if at the time of signing the contract, this particular organization is not on the list, nothing will happen to you. Because this is not the way it works here. If on the other hand, you are already employed by the state, then it's hard to get rid of you. They could still get you `undermining the constitution' (you have to give an oath to uphold the constitution), but this is also not so easy.

As I said, they filter most of them out by simply not employing them.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by what_the_heck

But the question is also: is the current KKK considered a political organization ?

The problem with the KKK is that in a literal and legal sense, it doesn't exist. There are many chapters, but their affiliation is loose at best, and there are no formal links between them. That should not, however, be mistaken for an accident or a sign of weakness. The chapters of "the KKK" use this structure because it makes it impossible to meaningfully declare "the KKK" as a terrorist organization: there's no central organization to declare to be terrorist.

Individual chapters can, of course, be declared terrorist, and this has happened in the past. When it happens, the affected chapter doesn't survive for very long, but because it doesn't maintain formal links to other chapters, the fallout doesn't spread beyond that chapter. The result is that KKK chapters have to be shut down one by one, which is a difficult process to say the least.

So to answer your question, the current KKK isn't considered a political organization, because it isn't an organization at all.

[OreoCookie]

Ah, I see the problem.
So there are laws and regulations concerning state employees in the US?

[Spliffdaddy]

But you can be a Democratic congressman (Robert Byrd) if you were the "Exalted Cyclops" of your local Klan.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

But you can be a Democratic congressman (Robert Byrd) if you were the "Exalted Cyclops" of your local Klan.

Or a racist SOB like Strom Thurmond and be a Republican senator to the day you die.

Thurmond supported racial segregation with the longest filibuster ever conducted by a single Senator on the Senate floor, speaking for 24 hours and 18 minutes in an unsuccessful attempt to derail the Civil Rights Act of 1957.

V

[Spliffdaddy]

Exalted Cyclops

That's about 7 levels above a lowly racist.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Exalted Cyclops

That's about 7 levels above a lowly racist.

Bah a Racist Senator is a level 18 bastard, while an exalted cyclops is just a level 9 dichead. Everyone who's read the Player's Handbook knows that.

Byrd multi-classed and is now a lv 9 dichead/lv 18 Bastard while Thurmond never dual classed at all. Concentrating on being the best racist bastard Senator he could.

A single class always out-powers a multi-class. They just have more conviction and practice in what they do. Strom-Thurmond was a very bad man. If this were an adventure, the DM would already have sent the adventurers out to kill him because he was an evil threat to the kingdom.

If he wasn't already dead that is.. Byrd would probably be next up, but he is next up. Seven levels my ass.

V