@gorillapaws “I interpreted your answer to distill down to ‘they shouldn’t be prosecuted and also shouldn’t be fired.’”
As you now realize, that is not what I meant. But clarification is an important element of discourse, so what matters is that we ended up on the same page.
“This was based on my interpretation of your ’[they can be fired]... however….left alone’ phrasing.”
I don’t want to belabor the point, but that phrasing does not appear anywhere. My first response, which is about prosecution, doesn’t even discuss firing. My second response contains one paragraph that responds to @Pandora‘s factual question about the legal duties of off-duty police officers, a second paragraph where I reiterate my position with regards to prosecution, and some small text where I point out that rights can be abused (e.g., that rights protect us from prosecution does not mean that they cannot be used wrongly, with all the consequences that may entail). One has to cross paragraphs that address different subjects and remove a lot of important words to get ”[they can be fired]...however…left alone.”
“Of course I didn’t mean literally the guy standing next to the gallows… the point is anyone in the general vicinity of the protest would have seen the giant gallows”
The Capitol Building was surrounded on all sides by the various assembled groups, and the gallows were on the opposite side of the reflecting pool. I know people who were there counterprotesting who did not see the gallows until they saw them on the news. I would not be surprised, therefore, if many of the people right outside the building didn’t actually know about them.
In any case, I would agree that anyone who did know about them should have—at an absolute minimum—left the protest. And a police officer probably should have done more. I’ve marched with people I don’t like, and I don’t think one has to agree with someone on everything to protest alongside them. But that sort of overtly threatening behavior is way past anything that could be reasonably called a gray area.
“It sounds like we actually agree on all points.”
In the end, I think this is true. Regardless of who could see what from where, there was enough unacceptable behavior on all sides of the building that any police officer who continued protesting after the line was crossed ought to face termination.
“Apologies if the ambiguities in my post upset you.”
I’m not upset, but I do like to clarify things (sometimes to the point of tedium, I know—it’s an occupational hazard).