Justice Department tells Ferguson police to stop wearing bracelets



In a letter to Ferguson Police Chief Tom Jackson, the Justice Department said residents had told its investigators that officers policing protest sites on Tuesday in Ferguson were seen wearing “I am Darren Wilson” bracelets.

Let me get this straight. People come from all over the country to stand in solidarity with Michael Brown, but the co-workers of Darren Wilson are asked to not indicate any solidarity with him???

Now which side of this situation strikes you as being bastions of intolerance?

Now I would agree with the brass slap wrists for not wearing their proper name tags.


They shouldn’t have to be asked. They should have enough collective brains to realize it’s a bad idea and not wear the bracelets.


Name-calling is not very substantive. Do only black protesters have the right to solidarity? Calling someone stupid for being different is exactly the type of intolerance I was referring to.


Breaking news, in Ferguson, Police officer shot in arm, I don’t believe it is life-threatening.



The police exist to protect and serve the public, not to protect and serve themselves.

They should know better than to feed or reinforce any “us vs. them” mentality, and that includes wearing bracelets that make controversial social statements, especially while they are in the line of duty.


As a group, you think someone would have said, “gee, maybe this is provocative and we shouldn’t do it” and then, being the smart fellows they are, they would have realized that this wasn’t the best idea. After all, they are wearing bracelets supporting a man that did shoot an unarmed black man dead and facing protesters that believe that this was probably a murder. Now, I guess I’m being intolerant when I point out that this out, just as the Justice Department is being intolerant when they point it out.

I pretty much think that any police officer wearing such a bracelet on duty pretty much has no business being a police officer, but that’s just me.


I know, but they cannot do that if they lack cohesion. As human beings, if you work together in high stress environments, you develop camaraderie. Their emotional vestment in this situation is closer than that of most all of the protesters.

Professionalism is that protection that allows the transcendence of camaraderie necessary, as in redressing the wrong of a fellow officer A grand jury, as a representative of the public must consider whether criminal charges need to be filed. His co-workers are biased. They have to be biased, but they can’t be. The closest thing I can think of is what happens when a family member commits some crime. You may be a person who believes in justice, but you cannot find it in you to abandon the person.

But an armband is just an armband. It was not offensive speech. I would think a reasonable compromise would be to allow the armband as long as it was warn under a long sleeve shirt.


When you work in customer service, public service, etc., you’re usually not supposed to inflame the negative passions of those whom you serve. That seems to be a part of most of those jobs. It does not surprise me that those who are paid to keep the peace are not exempted from this rule.


It is too early to jump to conclusions as to the motive. I will be curious to see if it is related

…and if Al Sharpton shows up in support of him.


The Justice Department has proven repeatedly that it is a political arm of the Administration.


Just maybe, in this case, they are right.


But if that were the case, couldn’t the current administration be right about other things? :eek:


I totally understand camaraderie and the need for professional detachment–but how would you feel if your parish priest wore an armband showing solidarity with a priest accused of… some horrific crime? Well, maybe that’s not the best example.

I think they should do their jobs without communicating to the general public that “I am Officer X” while obscuring their badges or name tags–it sends alarming signals about the thin blue line, anonymity, and bias. The fact that these particular policemen chose to wear these armbands openly, on the job, suggests that there is something amiss in the Ferguson Police Department. It would be a shame to see them develop any more of a siege mentality.




I agree with, they are to protect and serve the public and not reinforce any us vs them mentality. Well said.


To suggest that its about “black people” having rights that others do not is beyond the pale. The feds stopped the police from wearing the bracelet because a police force should never incite people who are already angry. Are you aware.of how such a thing could escalate the problem?
That’s the reason it was stopped. Anyone who suggests another reason is spinning the truth.


Police are NEVER allowed to wear anything that states support for a cause with their uniform. Wearing something that shows opposition to the people you are supposed to be protecting is like waving a red flag in front of a bull and is very disrespectful.

They are free to express solidarity with a brother officer on their own time, not while they are being paid to be IMPARTIAL.


From the article:

The letter said the bracelets had “upset and agitated” people and “reinforce the very ‘us versus them’ mentality that many residents of Ferguson believe exists.”

The idea of this particular justice Department and AG to accusing others of reinforcing an us vs. them environment would be incredibly laughable were it not so filled with hypocrisy.



Sure they do. Haven’t you ever seen black bands across the badges to honor a fallen officer? Such displays can be limited, regulated or prohibited by policy.


Here’s my problem with this. The Justice Department seems to be advocating a policy that is arbitrary and capricious in it’s application.

They are not saying that wearing bracelets that advocate a cause is wrong, they are saying that people have complained and the police should stop. To have such a policy, they need to explain what the threshold of complaints is. Is it 10 complaints? 20? 30? Is it a specific cause?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.