Crossing Guard gets guns seized.

Very enlightening that the so called verbal threat occurred weeks before confiscation of weaponry. Clearly it took this much time to do a thorough investigation. What a ridiculous crew of asshats.
 
Very enlightening that the so called verbal threat occurred weeks before confiscation of weaponry. Clearly it took this much time to do a thorough investigation. What a ridiculous crew of asshats.

I read it that she didn’t go to the police until weeks later, after having talked with the vice principal, who’s married to the cop he was criticizing. Which makes it even worse, really.
 
Shocking that 40 years ago we survived without a resource officer in every school.
the only school issue i can recall before all the craziness was the texas tower shooter sometime in the mid 60's. there seemed to be a lull and moratorium on any major school mass violence for a good period of time.

and the janitor... he was named Wally
yeah, oddly the only 2 people i remember from my grammar school days, late 50's..into the early 60's, were our janitor, bill and the lunch lady, mrs. morgan. bill bought this really cool 1960 chevy impalla that seems to be the only car i remember him driving. the huge ride on lawn mower he used probably didn't count as a cool ride, does it? the impalla was a horrendous split pea soup green color. and mrs. morgan, she filled your plate to the max with the hot lunch, no child went hungry in her cafeteria. your folks couldn't scrape up the $1/week for the 20 cent/daily lunch, no problem. mrs. morgan took care of you with no fanfare or embarrassment. everyone had a hot mid day meal and milk. the woman worked 35 years in the school system without being reprimanded for feeding kids who needed help. everyone else in the school system was insignificant.
 
Agree. Just once i'd like to hear 'That's not an offense', or 'That activity is protected by law.' Instead, they show up and say 'We got a call', 'we got a complaint.'

I heard it once. Credit where due. Over the scanner one day, Framingham PD dispatch sent a cruiser to Stop&Shop where a church lady had spied a GUN on someone's hip as he got into his car and drove away. Cop took the info (she'd written down his description, the car and the plate) and dispatch confirmed he was an LTC holder (relaying his name and address over the radio [thinking]). Cop asked if dispatch wanted him to go to the man's home and dispatch said "why? He has an LTC. He's legal." or words to that close effect.

I imagine if he had come up without one they'd have visited the guy to chat about it.
 
I heard it once. Credit where due. Over the scanner one day, Framingham PD dispatch sent a cruiser to Stop&Shop where a church lady had spied a GUN on someone's hip as he got into his car and drove away. Cop took the info (she'd written down his description, the car and the plate) and dispatch confirmed he was an LTC holder (relaying his name and address over the radio [thinking]). Cop asked if dispatch wanted him to go to the man's home and dispatch said "why? He has an LTC. He's legal." or words to that close effect.

I imagine if he had come up without one they'd have visited the guy to chat about it.

The Boston Globe, of all places, once published a letter from some freaked-out member of the public who was riding the T when they became aware that another passenger nearby was carrying a concealed firearm. I think this was in the "Stops & Starts" column. The columnist responded, essentially, "Stop freaking out. You don't know who that person was. He could have been an off-duty or plainclothes cop. Also, plenty of people have licenses to carry concealed and there's no law prohibiting them from doing so on the T." Remarkably common-sense answer, considering it was the Globe.
 
Related to the discussions we've been having in this thread.

Doing nothing wrong? Inside your own home? Own guns? If luck really isn't on your side, police might kick in your door and kill you. If it's just slightly not on your side, they might just kick in your door without killing you. Why? Because someone said they saw a gun. "Our bad."

 
It is always the soft targets first.
Much safer and predictable for the popo to disarm an 84 year old than say a 26 year old.
And in the softest places, i mean if massachusetts is sinking (politically), places like the vineyard are the ballast.
The firearms are out of his hands and that is their goal. Fortunately for this man, his family is in the business, but for so many others, storage fees for the firearms along with legal fees for appeal can become prohibitive.
 
It is always the soft targets first.
Much safer and predictable for the popo to disarm an 84 year old than say a 26 year old.
And in the softest places, i mean if massachusetts is sinking (politically), places like the vineyard are the ballast.
The firearms are out of his hands and that is their goal. Fortunately for this man, his family is in the business, but for so many others, storage fees for the firearms along with legal fees for appeal can become prohibitive.

I dunno how smart it is to p- off a guy that's lived longer than the tables say he should and has (even if it was decades ago) experience in warfare.

Most of us would lose our homes, our families, our fortunes. He would lose another 2 to 7 years of creaking bones and playing cribbage.
 
I dunno how smart it is to p- off a guy that's lived longer than the tables say he should and has (even if it was decades ago) experience in warfare.

Most of us would lose our homes, our families, our fortunes. He would lose another 2 to 7 years of creaking bones and playing cribbage.


I guess. I mean they got his firearms. He was compliant with their demands. How is that not a soft target?

No offense to the octogenarians out there, but it would be a damn sight to see one try to physically resist an officer.

The other losses you mention, family , money, etc. also make someone a soft target. And this man may have those as well.
 
I guess. I mean they got his firearms. He was compliant with their demands. How is that not a soft target?

No offense to the octogenarians out there, but it would be a damn sight to see one try to physically resist an officer.

The other losses you mention, family , money, etc. also make someone a soft target. And this man may have those as well.

Sure, he was a "good" boy and complied. But if he'd chosen differently they might have had a problem on their hands.
 
Well, most people that are generally law-abiding are not likely to go postal - "I've done nothing wrong, it's a mistake that will be cleared up...."

Witness the thread around here, "How do I get my guns back." Despite the fact that the OP in that thread was apparently railroaded, he STILL wanted to be polite and reasonable, because he was in the right.

The only people that bust caps in cops' asses, are criminals, before they shot the cops.

If you're a good guy (Eligible for an LTC), you're not of criminal attitude and intent, and are not likely to throw down.

Hell, in The Patriot, Mel didn't get Mel-ish when his farm was raided, and his house torched....he needed a bit more ("Stupid boy...." Jason Isaacs plays a great bad guy), before he got riled.

Damn few here, would do anything other than hand over the iron, when a bunch of cops show up, for no known reason. It's not cowardice; we just assume that all will be well...because it generally is.

We may carry for personal protection, but how many times have you actually needed it? (I know, I've not used my kitchen fire extinguisher, but I have one.) We live in a peaceful society, in a peaceful part of the world. We don't have a daily need to fight for survival. That's part of the reason I started my "First World Problems" thread. [laugh]
 
Well, most people that are generally law-abiding are not likely to go postal - "I've done nothing wrong, it's a mistake that will be cleared up...."

Witness the thread around here, "How do I get my guns back." Despite the fact that the OP in that thread was apparently railroaded, he STILL wanted to be polite and reasonable, because he was in the right.

The only people that bust caps in cops' asses, are criminals, before they shot the cops.

If you're a good guy (Eligible for an LTC), you're not of criminal attitude and intent, and are not likely to throw down.

Hell, in The Patriot, Mel didn't get Mel-ish when his farm was raided, and his house torched....he needed a bit more ("Stupid boy...." Jason Isaacs plays a great bad guy), before he got riled.

Damn few here, would do anything other than hand over the iron, when a bunch of cops show up, for no known reason. It's not cowardice; we just assume that all will be well...because it generally is.

We may carry for personal protection, but how many times have you actually needed it? (I know, I've not used my kitchen fire extinguisher, but I have one.) We live in a peaceful society, in a peaceful part of the world. We don't have a daily need to fight for survival. That's part of the reason I started my "First World Problems" thread. [laugh]

I mean that is kind of my point. Most "good" people will comply and let it play out in court. There is a long term problem with that. And i readily admit, it is not one for which i have a solution...
Not only legislative law.
Case law is being built, all over out country, that is justifying these types of confiscations. Whether it is from upheld appeals, or just a lack of appeals. Lets face it, even the most innocent individual is shelling out over 5k to PROVE THEIR INNOCENCE. Not feasible for everyone. And possibly still not win.
The law is channelled through so many intermediaries...
I mean don't you think the cheif's hands are tied here? Maybe even the judges? They have to protect themselves, professionally.
Our justice system will put blame on these people should they "grant him back his rights" and he ever has a firearms incident.
It is a long way back from how far we have gone.....
 
Back
Top Bottom