Race

Courthouse Won't Give In to Retired Cops Who Say Kid's 'Black Lives Matter' Art Is Hate Speech

"This is the cultural response of a middle school student, here in Central Islip, to present-day America," says chief judge.

|

screenshot/CBS 2 New York

So much eyeroll at retired New York City police officer Ed Munoz, who's campaigning against a middle-schooler's Black Lives Matter poster, calling it "hate speech." The poster, displayed in the Suffolk County District Courthouse in Central Islip, New York, says: "Stop The Violence. Black Lives Matter. Stop the Racism."

Munoz, a former NYPD officer with failed political ambitions, now co-hosts an Internet radio show called "Everything Matters." 

"'Black Lives Matter,' we feel, is anti-police and the rhetoric that they spew is anti-police," Munoz told CBS New York, describing the kid's artwork as hate speech and claiming that Black Lives Matter activists roam the streets of Manhattan calling for the death of police officers. Another retired NYPD cop, Lieutenant John Pribetich, worried about what could happen "if it affects a juror."

Because heaven forbid jurors be primed to be conscientious about racism in the criminal justice system… 

The poster was commissioned by the court as part of a request to a local middle school for art that celebrates different cultures. "It is not the intention of the court to put forth any anti-law enforcement message," the county's chief administrative judge, C. Randall Hinrichs, told CBS. "This is the cultural response of a middle school student, here in Central Islip, to present-day America."

While offending the law enforcement community is "the last thing we want to do," added Hinrichs, the poster would stay up for the rest of the month, as originally planned. Regardless of how some people may interpret it, "it talks about stopping violence and racism, which are admirable sentiments," he said. 

NEXT: A.M. Links: Snowden Backs Apple in Privacy Showdown, Bernie Leads Hillary in New Poll, University of Texas to Allow Handguns in Classrooms

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Holy shit, what a dick. A dick and a pussy.

    Is he saying that killing black people is so central to what it is to be police that any suggestion that maybe police shouldn’t murder black people is an attack on all police?

    1. Hang on, Zeb, quit being such an anti-transperson shitlord.

      1. That was anti-hermaphrodite. And everyone hates hermaphrodites.

        1. MY MOMDAD WAS A HERMAPHRODITE YOU SON OF A BITCH.

          1. I took Zeb’s comment as praising the Detective and his cat, isn’t that what he meant?

  2. Bitch is just pissed letters don’t die from gunshot wounds.

  3. Fuck cops, and fuck Black Lives Matter.

  4. I wonder if any of the special snowflakes on college campuses will read this and discover why “hate speech” laws are a bad thing.

    1. No.

  5. Apparently this guy didn’t get the memo. It’s times like this that you’re supposed to circle the wagons and lay low, waiting for the fickle public to move on to some other protest du jour. You’re definitely not supposed to do stupid stuff that continues to piss the public off.

  6. “The poster was commissioned by the court as part of a request to a local middle school for art that celebrates different cultures”

    There is no ‘blacklivesmatter’ culture. There is a blacklivesmatter activist group.

    Munoz(isn’t it funny how POC can be racist sometimes? I guess brownlivesonlymatterwhentheydorighthink) is being a stereotypical asshole cop.

    The kids’ using the premise to air a grievance, ignoring the actual request.

    Both, the kid and the cop, are doing the same thing. Pushing their POVs.

    Why does Reason care about either? Worse, why does Reason seem to want its readership to support the kids right to air his POV over the cops?

    1. “Both, the kid and the cop, are doing the same thing. Pushing their POVs.”

      The kid presented POV. The cop presented POV. At this point no one really gives a fucking noodle aside from minor hee-hawing.

      Mr. Awesome Police Officer Man Munoz THEN decides to censor the kid’s POV through direct action. A non-issue has morphed into a slightly notable one momentarily. Hence, the passing write-up by ENB and the resulting comments.

    2. why does Reason seem to want its readership to support the kids right to air his POV over the cops?
      What the hell are you taking about? The cop has a fucking radio show. He has the right and means to air his POV all he wants. What he doesn’t have a right to do is to censor (or demand that someone censor) someone else’s POV.

      You make a reasonable point that the kid missed the point of the assignment. But that is irrelevant here.

    3. There is no ‘blacklivesmatter’ culture. There is a blacklivesmatter activist group.

      As long as there’s a law-enforcement community, there’s a blacklivesmatter culture.

    4. Why does Reason care about either? Worse, why does Reason seem to want its readership to support the kids right to air his POV over the cops?

      Wait, you’re serious? You can’t actually grok the objective reality unfolding before you?

      Oh, there’s the problem. You had your yokel distortion field turned up to 11.

      1. Fuck you, JW. What if Black Lives Matter ends up reducing the number of murdered black people? Think about how bad that will make Azathoth!! feel.

        Maybe think about someone else for a change, asshole.

        1. Damn it, Sug, when you’re right, you’re right.

          When you stop thinking about the plight of them pesky, little niggers making furtive movements, reaching for the waistbands for their invisible thug-guns that they all carry and failing to follow orders and to stop resisiting, putting the fear of their life into the hands of an all-loving God into those brave, brave officers, it all starts to make sense.

          1. Damn I feel old, I was still thinking it was supposed to be the razor they all carry in their shoes they were reaching for.

        2. Reducing the number of murdered black people? Shouldn’t other black people who do the vast majority of that murdering be involved in that project somehow?

          Fuck cops, and fuck identity politics. Law enforcement proves almost every day that they’re perfectly capable of equal opportunity murdering.

    5. Worse, why does Reason seem to want its readership to support the kids right to air his POV over the cops?

      Because kids haven’t taken jobs involving throwing people in cages for not harming anyone?

    6. “The cop has a fucking internet radio show”

      Fixed that for ya.

      I’m seeing the ex-cop using the mighty power of his internet show trying to shame a judge into taking down a poster.

      No governments getting involved, no litigation. Just an ex-cop blathering to his audience of other ex and current cops about this kids poster.

      Just looks like two people using their first amendment rights. One stupidly, the other a bit inappropriately.

      The posters’ staying up.

      So the story is over.

      Ex-cop is being a dick. So? People are allowed to be dicks–hell, Sugarfree’s made a career out of it.

      I may not like what the cop is saying or doing on his internet radio show–but nothing wrong is going on here. Everyone is acting well within the principles of liberty.

      Kid made a comment–which he had every right to do, cop whined about said comment–which he had every right to do, judge told him to go piss up a rope–which he had every right to do.

      Of course a person had the right to demand someone censor themselves. But the person in question is under no obligation to do so.

      My point is that reason seems to want the commentariat to condemn the cop for expressing opinions they don’t like–kinda like the cop wanted the judge to condemn the kid for expressing opinions the cop didn’t like.

      Nothing bad has happened here. Free speech and common sense worked as they should.

  7. Courthouse Won’t Give In to Retired Cops Who Say Kid’s ‘Black Lives Matter’ Art Is Hate Speech

    “If I don’t like it, then it is hate speech!”

    That’s how it works, kiddies.

    1. Exactly. The left’s penchant for calling “hate speech” to silence disent was bound to go mainstream. At some point, anything that doesn’t conform to another person’s beliefs will be hate speech.

    1. Oh man, you just KNOW he beats off to Steven Segal movies.

      1. Doesn’t everyone, though? *looking around* Never mind.

    2. I was expecting the shades to be mirrored.

    3. What? Puerto Rican?

      What the hell are you saying?

  8. Stupid fucking pigs. Always trying to stomp on free expression. Don’t they realize this is America? Don’t they realize we have free speech? Have they ever even read the Constitution? How do these people get jobs? Isn’t it a requirement to learn basic human rights if your job is to protect them? Stupid fucking pigs need to be muzzled. Everything that comes out of their mouths is hate speech. It’s no wonder they incite children to violence against them. When will Americans wake up and realize that this police state we live under will destroy this great country.

    (How’d I do? Did oil go up at all or at least stop falling?)

    1. I give you an 8.

  9. While offending the law enforcement community is “the last thing we want to do,” added Hinrichs…

    Well, as long as it’s on the list – and I sure hope that’s a very short list.

  10. Retired at 31, according to the linked blurb. How the fuck does that work?

    1. They only police officer I know who retired at that age was because he was diagnosed as HIV+.

    2. He punched out all the pips on his dead black kid card.

      Kill nine and the tenth one is free (of even a cursory investigation.)

    3. Disability fraud has to be the early favorite, although I haven’t checked the Vegas odds yet.

      1. Disability is such bullshit now. At a certain time, becoming physically unable to perdorm manual labor would have doomed a man’s family to lower living circumstances. That isn’t the case these days. This guy —
        not saying he definitely got a medical retirement, but if he did — would he a prime example. Why should a guy get a defined benefit at 31 when he is working in another career.

  11. The problem with Hate Speech Laws is right in the name; they hate speech.

  12. Want to earn over internet from your couch at home by working easy jobs with your dekstop or laptop for 2-6 h a day, get 56 dollars hourly and get a paycheck at the end of each week and choose yourself the time when you work and for how long. Then start by visiting this link……am…….

    http://www.alpha-careers.com

  13. Designating something ‘hate speech’ is forbidding someone from having certain sentiments. Fuck them.

    1. Orwell had it right: to control speech is to control thought. Once certain words become unspeakable, the thoughts associated with them become unthinkable.

  14. It pretty much is hate speech the way it is being used.

    But that is perfectly legal.

    1. And by that it’s apparently often used by blacks to confront white people, then beat them up when they don’t answer “Yes, all black lives matter” right away.

  15. The technology is so developed that we can watch videos, live streaming, TV serials and any of our missed programs within our mobiles and PCs. Showbox
    All we need is a mobile or PC with a very good internet connection. There are many applications by which we can enjoy videos, our missed programs, live streaming etc.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.