Patterico's Pontifications

10/17/2007

I Think I’ll Stay Hidden, Thank You

Filed under: General — Jack Dunphy @ 2:24 pm



[Guest Post by Jack Dunphy]

I have been criticized in some quarters for hiding behind a pseudonym when writing my columns for National Review Online. And it was my continued use of the pseudonym that prompted the Los Angles Times to drop me as an occasional contributor to their op-ed pages. But whenever I’m tempted to unmask myself I stop to consider the consequences to my police career that would surely follow. As if to remind me to stay hidden comes this story from San Francisco, where John Lewis, a veteran sergeant with the SFPD, is under investigation for writing a letter to the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle. In the letter, Lewis criticized the city’s handling of the homeless in Golden Gate Park. He now faces administrative charges and the possibility of a suspension or an admonishment on the grounds that his letter “undermines the efficiency of the department.”

I have little faith that I would be treated any differently by the LAPD if my identity were to become known.

–Jack Dunphy

35 Responses to “I Think I’ll Stay Hidden, Thank You”

  1. Jack Dunphy, I support you entirely in your decision and feel you made a good one. Where I live, school teachers, doctors (who are paid by the government by law in Canada), bus drivers, plumbers, etc., all are free to write letters to the editor expressing their opinion including about their industry. I do and am.

    It’s sad that you in the police forces of America are not. I’m sure I’ve seen many op-eds a few different police officers from Vancouver, BC, in the Province and/or Sun newspapers. A couple of these are regular, long-term op-eds. They publish under their name with a byline indicating their views do not represent the department.

    These officers (for example Mark Tonner in the Vancouver Sun with his “Out of the Blue” pieces) often call for stricter enforcement than is the current norm and criticize judges as being too lax (a very common concern where I live). Yet the city of Vancouver still seems to function and people call the police when they need them.

    Why a police officer in your country can’t express their opinion in a letter to the editor or op-ed without their Mayor or Chief of Police going apesh*t on them is a mystery to me. And it’s unfortunate.

    Keep up the good work on and off the job. Shame on San Fransisco although that will be nothing new for that city.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  2. It’s one thing to have a policy that treats everyone the same, such as a policy that discourages all police officers from public comment. That policy would chafe but at least it applies equally to all. It’s quite another to selectively enforce the policy so that it silences inconvenient views. I’m not a Californian but that seems to be the rule there and many other places as well.

    DRJ (67ced6)

  3. The liberal ruling class is committed to stomp, crush, kill any outspoken conservative in their midst. You see this in spades at the elite universities and most of the major institutions. Lenin would be proud. And Mr Dunphy would do best to stay anonymous.

    Jack (a9896a)

  4. Vancouver is very liberal, the mayor is (I think, and I could we way wrong on details, but am right on tone) who admitted to providing heroin to a 20-year old prostitute in Vancouver, buying crack for another 41-year old prostitute also in downtown Vancouver’s hideously hellish downtown east side (just gross), plus smoking said crack, brought in legal drug injection sites (surprise) against the objections of police, is a huge supporter of gay rights, and is as left-wing as you could imagine… but still Vancouver police can write an op-ed.

    This link is interesting, Jack.

    Although, unfortunately, he dumped the troublesome police chief and replaced him with a left-winger, so I don’t know how long open communication among police officers will be tolerated.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  5. Actually, sorry, I am exactly right on the details, I checked before writing my comment… these are things he admitted to in statements to Canada’s Royal Canadian Mounted Police… I just forgot to delete that part in parenthesis at the top.

    My impression is Canada’s police are freer to speak their mind than yours, which is unfortunate considering your first ammendment.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  6. Tell it to Scott Thomas Beauchamp, Christoph.

    alphie (99bc18)

  7. What the hell does that mean, troll? Don’t answer that. Your comment was worthless.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  8. Christoph, ignore the jackass braying in the distance, on that lonely grassy moonbathed hill.

    Paul (d71395)

  9. I get it now. And he was wrong on tone too, a-hole. U.S. forces are by and large not psychopathic dog murderers nor people who attack female uniformed contractors or soldiers for having a war injury.

    Don’t tell me that there is the odd exception which proves the rule because I already know that.

    Beauchamp lied not just about the army, but about actual people. The people he served with who were there to protect his back when he got in a firefight. He slurred his unit, falsely, and all the men and/or women in it. He accused them of horrific actions and it was all a lie. So he got the tone wrong too.

    You’re a jerk for your last comment and, if you had any honor, you would apologize. If you don’t, then you have no honor.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  10. “Jack Dunphy” has made many accusation against his fellow City of Los Angeles employees, Christoph.

    alphie (99bc18)

  11. Thanks for going all ad hominum again in the last paragraph of post #9 Christoph . . . for two whole paragraphs I was worried you’d been kidnapped by some being that actually valued rationality over and above name-calling and meaningless personal attacks.

    Phil (6d9f2f)

  12. Hmmmm… if I was wrong about who you were referring to, I apologize, alphie.

    But I’ll say that since you now talking about Jack Dunphy, I don’t think he’s comparable to Beauchamp. The latter made outrageous physically impossible allegations… and the former is credible.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  13. Aaah,

    The Truthers who say a Humvee could never run over a dog, Christoph?

    I think they nicely balance the “steel don’t melt” crowd.

    alphie (99bc18)

  14. alphie, you liar. No one said a Humvee could “never” run over a dog. They said a Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle was not capable of making the maneuvers necessary to do what Thomas said, and also that his visibility would make it very difficult to accomplish if it was.

    You’re a god damn troll liar and you should be ashamed of yourself.

    Back on track, Jack Dunphy, good call and yet again, another great post.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  15. The lefties of San Francisco are crushing dissent! But – but lefties told us that dissent is the highest form of patriotism.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  16. Shut up, alphie. This thread has nothing to do with Beauchamp.

    And the rest of you should just ignore him.

    Thus says the host.

    Patterico (cff6b2)

  17. #11

    Phil, the truth is never an ad hominem. So when I say that you are a small-minded reactionary it is not an ad hominem.

    Alan Kellogg (d66493)

  18. *Beauchamp, not “Thomas”. Sorry, got the names Thomas and Scott Beauchamp mixed up in my mind. I know there’s a difference.

    And yes, I agree ignoring alphie is good. Just had to add this update for clarity. Sorry for replying to the troll.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  19. Jack, good idea to maintain your anonymity.

    The losers at the LAPD would tar/feather you if you give them the chance.

    thebronze (f093a7)

  20. How ironic. I am sure the San Francisco lefties hailed Valarie and her husband as heros when were attempting to overthrow the American government by repeatedly lying on the pages of the New York Times.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  21. I think the public and powers-that-be would be well served to hear and heed the constructive criticism of a cop who actually mixes with the very element the taxpayers are footing the bill for (homeless). Its troubling he faces an administrative slap not only for practicing his right to free speech but also for the thoughtful addressing of a devastating issue.

    On the upside, hats off to a man unafraid to speak his mind and not hide behind an alias.

    Dana (a0f186)

  22. Yikes. Mr. Dunphy, I certainly didn’t mean to infer you are afraid to speak your mind thus hiding behind an alias – on the contrary, one does what they must and if the most effective way for you to get enlighten the public with your unique insights is with an alias, then so be it. Your NRO essays are always a welcome read.

    Dana (a0f186)

  23. While we’re on the subject of foreign affairs, does anyone think the reason President, (soon to be Prime Minister) Vladimir Putin is paying a visit to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is to apologize for the Russian’s failed defense missle and air attack system that Iran bought and deployed in Syria? Many would love to be that “fly on the wall” and listen to that converstation.

    Does anyone know that CNN’s Wolf Blitzer thinks Steven Cobert’s announcement to run for the POTUS deserves serious consideration? Should Ellen DeGeneres get her abandoned dog back? Was Chris Matthews serious when he attempted to get Barbara Boxer to say President Bush is “unstable”? Could anyone possibly find out that Patterico and Mohammad Ali are distant cousins? Somebody stop me!!!!

    Sorry, I was attempting to do verbal calestetics for my Alphie “target group communications” interview.

    Mr. “Dunphy”

    Smoking cigarettes is banned in Golden Gate Park (SF), but at a recent free Concert that I attended the “smoke cloud” was prevalent in the form of a different herb. Last time I checked, one was legal and the other wasn’t.

    addendum: The music was absolutely fabulous right up to the point where the artist stopped perfoming and began their “dixie-chicking” BS.

    Can we get a “fairness doctrine” for the music industry? Or maybe a tax on when they open their mouths and something other than music comes out? Ironically it was “Fleet Week” in the Bay Area, and the Blue Angels did a few fly-bys that drowned out the music while I proudly saluted.

    Rovin (7f64b8)

  24. Jack,

    I’m sure it’s not just the police who would take action against things you have written. I work in health care and would be fired on the spot if my employer ran across my blog.

    Azygos (6b768f)

  25. Alphie, you know Scott was reporting atrocities, while he was still in Germany, right

    narciso (d671ab)

  26. Alan Kellogg:

    Phil, the truth is never an ad hominem. So when I say that you are a small-minded reactionary it is not an ad hominem.

    It’s not an ad hominem, but it’s not true, either. Reactionaries, by definition, advocate “reaction,” i.e., a change back to the political status quo ante (as opposed to advocating the status quo, as conservatives typically do). Phil is a small-minded loon, but for better or for worse, few of his kooky ideas have ever been U.S. policy. Therefore, by definition, he is a small minded non-reactionary.

    Xrlq (6c2116)

  27. So in the liberal nirvana that is LA, a government employee cannot speak truth to power without the fear of retribution?

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  28. Just wondering if you are still accusing your department of selectively enforcing a mandated towing law, which turns out not to be mandated at all.

    Itsme (689e6f)

  29. Could we start a write-in campaign for “Jack for Mayor”?

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  30. Jack,

    The day LAPD learns your true name is the day IA opens a case on you on some BS trumped up misconduct charge. Isn’t it funny how the liberals who claim to all for protecting our rights, fight so hard to abridge our first amendment rights when they disagree with us. Jack, protect your true identity even it means you might have to stop righting. LAPD will screw you if they get the chance.

    Bud Dickman (2a4d4b)

  31. Every day, when I write this blog, I assume that Steve Cooley is reading it, and knows my name. Does this constrain me? Sure. It doesn’t cause me to say anything dishonest, but it constrains me — as do ethical rules relating to my profession (rules not applicable to cops).

    Look at it this way. Will Beall is an LAPD officer who writes under his own name. Whatever he publishes is, I believe, honest — just as the things I publish here are honest. But if Beall shares any of Dunphy’s opinions — and I have no idea if he does — he is probably constrained not to express the more radical of them.

    There is a place for people like Jack Dunphy. They tell us things about the organizations they work for that we can’t learn any other way. It’s important that they be honest men (or women) of character. But Dunphy is. I know that from his writing style and from having met him.

    (I keep trying to get Beall to post here, by the way. No luck so far, but I’m persistent.)

    Patterico (bad89b)

  32. By the way, Bud Dickman, I really admire your work on the Phil Hendrie show.

    Patterico (bad89b)

  33. I’d congratulate “Dunphy” for his wisdom in keeping his disguise on, but really, it’s just a lack of extreme stupidity. I actually think his writing demonstrates that he’s a very smart guy, but applauding him for not outing himself is sort of like congratulating him for, yet again, not sticking his fork in his eye.

    Joel Rosenberg (677e59)

  34. I don’t understand how he’s been able to do it for so long without being discovered. You’d think that somebody somewhere who knows him would figure it out. Or follow the isp trail. Or is it just that they know who he is but can’t prove it?

    CraigC (c4ea17)

  35. Mr. Patterico,

    Thank you. Its a tough job but I do my best.
    http://www.angelfire.com/ca4/philhendrie/bud.html

    Bud Dickman (2a4d4b)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2726 secs.