Framingham Police Officer’s past affects gun license

[LadySmith]

www.metrowestdailynews.com/top_stor...ham-Police-Officer-s-past-affects-gun-license

From what I hear this officer is a full-time prick on the job, and I find it total B.S. that he now says he won't detail what the charges were that he faced when he was 15.

GUESS WHAT PAL? If the laws apply to us mere citizens, they should apply to you, too.

As much as I'm pro-Second Amendment, I am equally anti-Double-Standard-for-Criminal-Cops. FIRE THIS GUY. AND FIRE THE CHIEF WHO'S COVERED UP FOR HIM

If we don't like the laws we can and must work to change them. But for the time that the laws are what they are, I insist that a criminal cop gets held to the same standard that we mere mortals are held.

The hypocrisy in Framingham is sickening, and I hope someone out there sues over this.

 

[appraiser]

Deval will give him a pardon, just watch.

There was a cop in Wakefield who couldn't get a permit and "carried on the badge"

 

[LadySmith]

Of course he will. The brothas stick together. And I'll reiterate my point: I wish juvie records weren't unsealed, but it is what it is. If they're going to be unsealed and used agains US, then the same rules should apply to cops, especially a stuck-up, butthead like this guy is reputed to be.

 

[TimMcG74]

www.metrowestdailynews.com/top_stor...ham-Police-Officer-s-past-affects-gun-license

From what I hear this officer is a full-time prick on the job, and I find it total B.S. that he now says he won't detail what the charges were that he faced when he was
GUESS WHAT PAL? If the laws apply to us mere citizens, they should apply to you, too.

As much as I'm pro-Second Amendment, I am equally anti-Double-Standard-for-Criminal-Cops. FIRE THIS GUY. AND FIRE THE CHIEF WHO'S COVERED UP FOR HIM

If we don't like the laws we can and must work to change them. But for the time that the laws are what they are, I insist that a criminal cop gets held to the same standard that we mere mortals are held.

The hypocrisy in Framingham is sickening, and I hope someone out there sues over this.

There are very few places on earth I despise more than Slumingham. Everything there is tainted.

 

[mllanes]

BABY NEAR A GUN! 1 million years in prison!

 

[OfficerObie59]

So to be clear: are you advocating that juvie records for everyone no longer be sealed? After all if you think it's BS the officer won't release the content yet if you are truly anti-double standard it seems to me you have to advocate you want all juvenile records to be opened up. If I'm wrong, please square that discrepancy for me. If you ask me the new law is BS. And it seems to me you get nowhere when you advocate for equal infringement of everyone's rights.

And who is going to sue over this? You can't just sue because you don't like something. A little thing called "standing"...

In general, and in particularly on gun issues, the double standard is worthy of debate. To be clear, I'm not denying that. But your point seems to be inherently hypocritical, unless of course you believe a crime committed at age 8 should follow you around in all areas of your life, not just in obtaining an LTC.

Just an FYI--a PD can choose to fire an officer who cannot obtain an LTC, see Sweeney v. Town of Franklin. If you work in a municipality where this is not done, the political process is at your disposal.

 

[terraformer]

A change in the Criminal Offender Record Information, or CORI law, that goes into effect in May is opening juvenile crime records — even those that were sealed by the judge — to the firearms licensing board and other agencies.

Previously, those records were not revealed.

Someone should ask Guida why this law is needed since they have been opening sealed records for PDs and FRB for 2 years now. If it had been legal to do this for those two year, why the new law (which is meant to further protect those with delinquency findings...)?

 

[OfficerObie59]

Someone should ask Guida why this law is needed since they have been opening sealed records for PDs and FRB for 2 years now. If it had been legal to do this for those two year, why the new law (which is meant to further protect those with delinquency findings...)?

Insofar as one belives in licensing and restrictions based on criminal history, the bottom line is that juvenile dispositions in particular should have no bearing on licensure, cop or not.

 

[appraiser]

Have you seen some of the junior league gang bangers in DYS custody? There is no way I want them ever to have access to a weapon.

I want their records out there for all to see.

 

[terraformer]

Insofar as one belives in licensing and restrictions based on criminal history, the bottom line is that juvenile dispositions in particular should have no bearing on licensure, cop or not.

No argument from me.

Have you seen some of the junior league gang bangers in DYS custody? There is no way I want them ever to have access to a weapon.

I want their records out there for all to see.

You can bet that they aren't this guy and won't see their 19th birthday without some major PD contact. The problem is delinquency hearings are notoriously lax and as there is no jail time, in re winship doesn't apply, so substantive due process rights are not implicated because, sans this "privilege", liberty is not in jeopardy.

 

[SamH]

The lack of his firearms permit has not affected his job. Chief Steven Carl is allowing Wareham to carry a firearm “on the badge,” which means he can have a gun while on duty.

Carl said he has never allowed an officer to carry a gun “on the badge before,” but he said this is a special circumstance.

From the article

 

[EC1]

Carry on the badge; I'll bet he carries his badge all of the time.

 

[Rick Roma]

What I don't understand is how this never affected him in the past. Did he not disclose his past when answering question 7 and/or question 10?

 

[n1oty]

No argument from me.



You can bet that they aren't this guy and won't see their 19th birthday without some major PD contact. The problem is delinquency hearings are notoriously lax and as there is no jail time, in re winship doesn't apply, so substantive due process rights are not implicated because, sans this "privilege", liberty is not in jeopardy.

This. There is no need to open up the juvi records. The gangbangers are simply going to re-offend right into adulthood. Supposedly, society has an interest in encouraging someone to turn their life around after a single mistake. Sealing a juvenile record is supposed to be the tool that ensures that. I think the Commonwealth has bigger fish to fry than this guy, who is obviously not a problem child anymore.

 

[Dr. CCW]

The whole issue of cops needing a license to carry when off duty makes no sense to me. If you are a LEO and have a gun on your belt 40-60 hours a week, to and from work, and to and from the range, you more or less have a LTC. As far as I know, you can also travel across state borders with a gun and after you retire, until you die. Wasn't there a law passed by George Bush allowing this? Please list one reference of a cop getting arrested because he/she did not have a LTC. Just one is all I need.

 

[ra5451]

If there was a Policy or Law for Law Enforcement Agencies that require officers to have a valid LTC-A, then this would not be an issue. I don't believe that any officer who has had their LTC revoked, should be able to carry on the job. What makes him/her "suitable" on the job, but "UN-suitable" off the job. And Police officers are on the job 7x24, so's its a wash.

 

[CrackPot]

I don't see the logic in railing against the Framingham Police officer. Instead of arguing "screw him like they screw us" we should be encouraging the Framingham Chief to find a way to help him and using that as leverage for change. Get suitability thrown out WITH police support with this as an example/motivator.

Anything anti directed AT the police in this case for trying to get the same result we all want his hypocritical and contrary to what I think our mutual goals are. We have to stop living up to stereotypes...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[FrugalFannie]

I wasn't the best decision maker as a kid and I was more mature than a lot of my friends. Fortunately I don't have a record because back then the cops would call your parents and you would get punished by your folks which was so much worse than anything the cops would have done. And everyone in town knew what you did and the adults would tell you that you screwed up and you had better watch your behaviour. I got ratted out more times by other adults who saw me doing something or hearing about it from their own kids and then they told my parents. SO glad none of that has kept me from owning guns.

I think it's more important that this guy (and others like him) made their mistakes when they were kids. It's ridiculous that juvie records are getting opened for gun licenses. IF the offense was a violent offense, MAYBE it should be considered. But one would think that since he has been on the force for 16 years he has changed his life. It's as ridiculous as being denied for a DUI when you were 19 and now you are in your 40's.

 

[OfficerObie59]

If there was a Policy or Law for Law Enforcement Agencies that require officers to have a valid LTC-A, then this would not be an issue. I don't believe that any officer who has had their LTC revoked, should be able to carry on the job. What makes him/her "suitable" on the job, but "UN-suitable" off the job. And Police officers are on the job 7x24, so's its a wash.

1. Not all cops are on the job 24/7. Depends on the particular PD.

2. Individual agencies may prescribe an LTC requirement, which if not met, can be used to terminate the officer. There is case law on this very issue in a circumstance virtually identical to this case.

3. The bottom line is that the power of municipal police officers to carry on duty (MGL ch. 41, s. 98) has been around long before (1906) the state required licenses to carry. Debate as you wish, but do keep in mind his wasn't some union backed legislation passed to protect shitty cops.

4. The argument you have has nothing to do with "suitability"--i.e., discretionary licensing-- but stupid blanket restrictions imposed by he legislature that leave no room for exceptions.

 

[highlander]

Not gun related but in the same vein. Back in the 60s a buddy decided he wanted to join the military and went down to the local Marine recruiting office to sign up. He told me his intent and I advised him that he couldn't join as he had a lengthy juvie record including a drug possesion charge. His attitude was "It's juvie so it's sealed" I told him this is Fed level they see what they want sealed or unsealed. Went back a week or so later and was told by the recruiter no dice you got a drug possesion charge.

 

[OfficerObie59]

IF the offense was a violent offense, MAYBE it should be considered.

I disagree with that as well.

There's no way to distill the facts of a particular charge into a criminal record, and some charges will make someone look like a monster on a juvie record but may be much more benign.

For example, as happened in the Franklin case (Wheeler, not Sweeney) 52 Mass.App.Ct. 631, I cited above, the officer had "Rape of a child" on his juvie record. What happened? When he was 15, he had sex with his 15 year old girlfriend. Someone tell me how that's fair?

Or for example, take a school yard fight between 14 year olds. I guarantee of the cops show up someone is getting charged. Why? Because the schools and the parents expect it as a result of all the bullying stuff that's dominated the headlines the past few years.

Neither scenario should lead to lifetime revocation of your RKBA. These cases shouldnt be about cops vs non-cops, they should be about how jacked up our asinine: statutes are.

 

[MisterHappy]

The problem that I see here is not the validity of the juvie record coming back to haunt someone....that's been an issue since '98 - stuff that was long ago, and (more or less) forgotten was now a disqualifier.

It's the double standard - if this guy were a business owner, his LTC being denied would not invoke a "special case" deal.

If the guy's truly "turned his life around" (as is occasionally mentioned here), then good for him - that being said, if one non-cop in the commonwealth was ever jammed up due to similar circumstances (both the original problem and the "Question 10" issue) then this guy should be held to the same standard.

Cops should not be held to a lower standard.

 

[n1oty]

The problem that I see here is not the validity of the juvie record coming back to haunt someone....that's been an issue since '98 - stuff that was long ago, and (more or less) forgotten was now a disqualifier.

It's the double standard - if this guy were a business owner, his LTC being denied would not invoke a "special case" deal.

If the guy's truly "turned his life around" (as is occasionally mentioned here), then good for him - that being said, if one non-cop in the commonwealth was ever jammed up due to similar circumstances (both the original problem and the "Question 10" issue) then this guy should be held to the same standard.

Cops should not be held to a lower standard.

I do not believe most of us are arguing for a lower standard. We are arguing that the use of juvenile records, especially OLD juvenile records do not properly reflect the "suitability" of adults.

 

[jraysig]

I'm surprised he got the job with a record.

 

[LadySmith]

I'm surprised he got the job with a record.

Exactly. I know all about "standing," and that's why I mentioned that I don't live in that toilet of a town. But I'm not going to get into a pissing match with a biased cop who posts here. I won't engage in discourse with the very biased poster here who thinks Wareham deserves a pass on this.

Why won't he disclose what the crime was? What was the crime he committed? Why won't anyone disclose? What is this "carrying on the badge" bullshit?

Personalities don't change. If he was a criminal at 15, and if he's refusing to disclose what the crime was, then it's got to be a bad one. He's not worthy of carrying a gun, any more than one of us citizens would be if the shoes were on our feet. Period.

All I'm saying is that cops should be held to the same standards that the rest of us are. I think the gun laws are too restrictive and suck. I think every law-abiding citizen should be armed and have the right to carry in all 50 states. But I don't want anyone with a criminal past carrying, and I sure as hell don't want cops getting special treatment.

Now that the juvie records are unsealed, let's hope the media relentlessly pursues the details under the FOIA. And let's hope any other person with a criminal background won't dare seek a very powerful position in a police department.

 

[Dr. CCW]

The whole issue of cops needing a license to carry when off duty makes no sense to me. If you are a LEO and have a gun on your belt 40-60 hours a week, to and from work, and to and from the range, you more or less have a LTC. As far as I know, you can also travel across state borders with a gun and after you retire, until you die. Wasn't there a law passed by George Bush allowing this? Please list one reference of a cop getting arrested because he/she did not have a LTC. Just one is all I need.

Here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
Unlike the Second Amendment, this federal law supersedes any state or local law. Cops don't need a LTC.

 

[terraformer]

Here it is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
Unlike the Second Amendment, this federal law supersedes any state or local law. Cops don't need a LTC.

There is question about how far federal law can control what a state does inside it's own borders. Possibly LEOSA may make it legal for a cop to carry in other states while not in their own one...

 

[Dr. CCW]

There is question about how far federal law can control what a state does inside it's own borders. Possibly LEOSA may make it legal for a cop to carry in other states while not in their own one...

I don't know about that. We're fighting for a Federal reciprocity law now. Assuming it might be passed one day, the state can't decide not to honor it. I'm not a lawyer, but I understand Federal Law supersedes State law, except in MA and IL, where the supreme leaders and all the King's men make, support, and enforce the laws. That's my understanding.

 

[terraformer]

I don't know about that. We're fighting for a Federal reciprocity law now. Assuming it might be passed one day, the state can't decide not to honor it. I'm not a lawyer, but I understand Federal Law supersedes State law, except in MA and IL, where the supreme leaders and all the King's men make, support, and enforce the laws. That's my understanding.

You aren't following this. A federal reciprocity law would not force states to issue licenses to their own residents. Same basic principle here.

 

[Dr. CCW]

You aren't following this. A federal reciprocity law would not force states to issue licenses to their own residents. Same basic principle here.

It is confusing. So, based on the LEOSA, I understand that if you work for a few years as a LEO, retire, make VT your permanent address, you have a LTC in all states for life, including MA.