more on "Monday"

[Joel S. Berson]

At 7/24/2012 08:50 AM, Amy West wrote:
>My point is probably moot: I believe in the coverage the off-duty
>admitted using it as a general insult, but not a specifically racial
>one, so the intent was there to insult but not on a "hate speech" basis.
>And note that the ball player *knew* the racial insult sense, which the
>cop says he didn't. So I guess the philosophical question comes down to
>Is the off-duty cop being a jerk or a bigoted jerk on his own time?

Or perhaps a bigoted jerk who is smart enough to know (or to have a
lawyer who knows) that the legal punishment and moral disapprobation
for a hate crime are more severe than for a general insult* (whether
he is found guilty by a state court or by his town's civil service
authority).  That would be true in Massachusetts, but I don't know
about New Hampshire, where the "crime" occurred.

* Even if "general insult" is not a misdemeanor, it would be
disapprobated less than a hate insult.

And was it on his own time?  Was he on paid detail as the ballpark,
or just visiting?  Aren't police officers bound by conduct rules at
all times, even when off-duty, as the military are?

Joel

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org