Most all of us here, for varying reasons, remain anonymous online. This is one of my reasons.
From Xavier Thoughts:
A Wisconsin middle school teacher has been placed on administrative leave after somebody informed school administrators of an internet photo of her with a rifle. Betsy Ramsdale had been a teacher at Beaver Dam Middle School for a little over a year when the bru-haha erupted. Superintendent Donald Childs states a "concerned staff member" reported the photo to school administration. Childs goes on to say that he is "unaware of any sinister intent" but he still suspended the instructor because the use of the photo on a personal Facebook page "appears to be poor judgment".
Gun owners who walk among hoplophobes in the daily course of their professional lives have long known that their jobs could be in jeopardy if too much is made of their gun ownership. If the wrong person in charge has a fear and loathing of firearms, they could find themselves in the unemployment line at a severe disadvantage. Many gun owners use pseudonyms online not because they fear government oppression, but because they recognize the very real, unjustified and ill informed snap judgements that can and probably will be made if they are exposed as gun owners in the workplace. It is sad that the life liberty and pursuit of happiness of many law abiding gun owners is placed in jeopardy if they exercise their first amendment right to speak about their second amendment rights.
More on this story at WKOW Madison, Wisconsin.
9 comments:
Oh come on. This is a violation of her first and second amendment rights. I have a very hard time believing this could hold up in court.
Yoou are correct. It is such a violation. However, to fight it costs one some money, which many may or may not be able to afford. They'd rather throw in the towel than fight what is by no means assured to be a winner.
Which is one of the ways the anti-gunners gain traction.
Or take the possible requirement to stamp ammo (not yet passed by no means certain it would). If they can't pass restrictions on guns themselves then pass a stupid ammo stamping act. The cost of retooling for most ammo makers would be so high as to force them out of business. No one could afford the ammo and thus a gun ban goes into effect without taking the guns.
Pasto-- thanks for the extra link. Where's you find it?
It would seem the NRA would want to take this one on. If not, then I don't know why they exist.
I googled the first sentence of your post.
It bothered me that the guy you linked to did not have a link, so I looked it up.
There are a lot of bloggers out there who think they are like the mainstream media and that they don't have to substantiate what they write. That guy is either a dummy, or he made a mistake.
I belong to the NRA & gladly so. However, they tend to compromise at times and pick and choose their battles. In no small part because, though as big as they are, they only have so many dollars for litigation. I would hope this would be one they would take up but I don't count on it.
His point is the second paragraph and the need for anonymity. In my case my bosses know about the guns and it doesn't bother them a whit (as long as I don't bring them into the office). Others in daily recourse beyond the office might not but, as far as the guns go I don't really care who knows it.
The anonymity for me here is because some of those same bosses, though they share some of my views & know I speak openly about them, would take a dim view of me sharing them online. Especially if they thought I was sliding them in during work time. And it's also a recognition that there are numbnuts out there who would think nothing of doling out a beating for expressing some of the things we do as we do here.
As far as Xavier's lack of link, I think (though don't know & am not making an excuse) that he may have used the video he included in his post (& I didn't) as his source. Thus citing it that way.
But thanks for adding the link.
I am sure the school Admin would love to hear from a few people about his decision.
childsd@beaverdam.k12.wi.us
Hey! Maybe the local chapter of the ACLU would take this case on...being such a blatant violation of The Constitutional Rights of citizens...you know, violating "civil rights" and all.
Ah, when pigs fly!
To deter employers from viewing social networking pages, employees might post on their pages legal terms of service under which employers agree to scram. This idea should not be taken as legal advice for any particular situation, just a topic for public discussion. --Ben
Post a Comment