I sure hope they didn't permanently assign him to "janitor" status just to make an example of someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
Printable View
I sure hope they didn't permanently assign him to "janitor" status just to make an example of someone.Quote:
Originally Posted by MikePal
"Moral" issues (should they have been shot or shouldn't they), imo really have little to do with it.
He refused a direct order and he is a CO, a branch of law enforcement.
Done, end of debate imo.
Can just imagine the uproar if some LEO refused a direct order. How many of our finest stood down during the G20? Or conversely what if the poop had hit the fan, and some sympathetic officers refused orders and let anarchy...
High River?
Whose head should be rolling? Those who carried out their orders, or those who gave the orders?
In fact whose head should have rolled for the G20? Fentons? hardly.There is thing called chain of command. And nowhere is it more important than in......
He doesn't get to decide what is right/wrong, morally right/wrong (for him) once given a direct order.
In the military environment you're only able to refuse a direct order if it is 'unlawful'...if you use that as a bench mark, then he has to be disciplined.Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
He should've been promoted. He's a hero in most peoples eyes so good for him for standing up to the man. F'k management.
The team system breaks down when the partners can't be trusted to follow orders or the plan. Don't like the plan or the orders being given, look for a process top change them or look for another job. Sounds like he has opted for another job. If he was let away with ignoring his orders....what does that say to others who may be similarly inclined?