• If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership  The benefits pay for the membership many times over.

Interesting Admission from a Police Officer on "Today"

Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
2,546
Likes
78
Location
Palmer, MA
Feedback: 5 / 0 / 0
I've actually heard this one before, but this morning on the "Today Show" an officer openly admitted on camera...

"Drunk driving enforcement is probably one of the only times a police officer is ever going to be able to prevent a homicide or death"

I found this very interesting and thought it was worth sharing. To me this is saying what most of us on NES already know: violent crime can rarely be prevented by the police. However, police tell us we don't need guns, call the police. Hmmmm......me thinks they are talking out both sides of the mouth!
 
However, police tell us we don't need guns, call the police. Hmmmm......me thinks they are talking out both sides of the mouth!


What Police are telling you this? I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I probably know more Police Officers than you do, and I don't know ANY who aren't Pro 2A. As for the rest of your post, I find the Officer's statement to be pretty accurate. However, OUI is a joke in the courts of Massachusetts. If you know someone who was found guilty of OUI in this state, I would bet that he was a grade "A" dirt bag, or he REALLY bombed on the field sobriety tests. Something that really bothers me is that Politicians will often tell the public that we need stronger OUI laws. We need more cops to prevent drunk drivers, we have to increase the penalties. Bulls**t! If we had Judges who enforced the laws we have, OUI would decrease drastically.
 
What Police are telling you this? I'm gonna go out on a limb here, and say that I probably know more Police Officers than you do, and I don't know ANY who aren't Pro 2A. As for the rest of your post, I find the Officer's statement to be pretty accurate. However, OUI is a joke in the courts of Massachusetts. If you know someone who was found guilty of OUI in this state, I would bet that he was a grade "A" dirt bag, or he REALLY bombed on the field sobriety tests. Something that really bothers me is that Politicians will often tell the public that we need stronger OUI laws. We need more cops to prevent drunk drivers, we have to increase the penalties. Bulls**t! If we had Judges who enforced the laws we have, OUI would decrease drastically.

You very well may know more police officers than me. However, I will say that I worked for years as an EMT and paramedic covering 911 in seven different towns, so it's not like I know one or two here. I agree with the "dirt bag" statement, as I am one brother short due to a drunk driver. It's not just the loss of a brother, the incident changed my family for good. They focus on getting someone for a .1....no....a .08....no wait, we're changing the level again. How about the dirtbag who is at .25 or something going to jail for the rest of his life? No, we don't do that. My brother's killer was simply deported. Then she snuck back in the country two years later. Again, another situation where they are focusing on the wrong end of the spectrum. Instead of just passing more and more laws....how about we enforce the ones on the books? There is enough education out there that supports a killing while driving drunk is 2nd degree murder....depraved indifference to human life. Back on point, it was the LE's comment on record that basically said these are pretty much the only cases where they can prevent homicide.
 
Last edited:
I've talked to numerous cops that say "I'm not into guns, just do my training and qualification". These are the same ones that never carry off duty and tell me they don't see a need for people to carry. Since they don't carry, why should the average citizen? I say BS...people should carry so they can defend their lives. Now, I was not a gun owner back when I worked EMS and I STILL thought their line of thought had run straight off the tracks.
 
I've talked to numerous cops that say "I'm not into guns, just do my training and qualification". These are the same ones that never carry off duty and tell me they don't see a need for people to carry. Since they don't carry, why should the average citizen? I say BS...people should carry so they can defend their lives. Now, I was not a gun owner back when I worked EMS and I STILL thought their line of thought had run straight off the tracks.


I think you're generalizing Police Officers.
 
I think you're generalizing Police Officers.

Obviously this is not every police officer. I am saying that across 7 different towns surrounding Boston and MANY contacts, this is the overall impression I got from them. The 2a supporters were the exception, not the rule. I am well aware if you go to western MA or other areas of the country, they realize not even the best police force can be everywhere all the time.
 
However, police tell us we don't need guns, call the police. Hmmmm......me thinks they are talking out both sides of the mouth!

You said "Police". Not, "A handful of cops I've met in the Boston area". Your statement implies that all Police feel this way. I know this is incorrect. Probably not what you meant, but it's kinda like "Most EMT's and Volunteer Firefighters drive a Geo Metro that's covered in lights and antennae. They wear giant belt buckles, and start fires so that they can be the first responder on scene". I would never say that, because I know that most EMT's and Volunteer Firefighters are genuinely good folks who do a great job.....but I met a few down by Boston a while back that fit this description.
Roger that?[hmmm]
 
First responders are irrelevant.

By the time they get there, not only has the SHTF, the S ran out and the fan stopped spinning long ago.

Have the skills, tools, and mindset to take care of yourself and yours. Others who aren't so disposed will have to deal with the consequences of their denial and/or laziness.

That is all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
First responders are irrelevant.

By the time they get there, not only has the SHTF, the S ran out and and fan stopped spinning long ago.

Have the skills, tools, and mindset to take care of yourself and yours. Others who aren't so disposed will have to deal with the consequences of their denial and/or laziness.

That is all.

+1
 
You said "Police". Not, "A handful of cops I've met in the Boston area". Your statement implies that all Police feel this way. I know this is incorrect. Probably not what you meant, but it's kinda like "Most EMT's and Volunteer Firefighters drive a Geo Metro that's covered in lights and antennae. They wear giant belt buckles, and start fires so that they can be the first responder on scene". I would never say that, because I know that most EMT's and Volunteer Firefighters are genuinely good folks who do a great job.....but I met a few down by Boston a while back that fit this description.
Roger that?[hmmm]

Dude, this wasn't a statistic or anything. It is just my impression from speaking with many LEOs around Boston. This is also not a hit on the job that LEOs are doing, just understanding the resources of departments are spread so thin. If you have some information that would be useful, I welcome it. Rather than going back an fourth in the thread, please PM me and I would be happy to discuss the matter further. Perhaps you can change my opinion?
 
Last edited:
Obviously I am biased, but I think with regard to the OP's first post there is some inaccurate gereralizations. On that topic I will simply say, just because some "big city" Chief might stand up at a podium and suggest gun control is then answer, don't think that he is speaking for the majority of those working the streets...

I've talked to numerous cops that say "I'm not into guns, just do my training and qualification".

Two different issues I'll bring up from that: #1 how does the above make them anti-2nd ammendment??? I don't carry my radio off duty does that make me anti 1st ammendment? For some guys its just a tool of the job. #2 allong those same lines just because someone isn't a card carrying NRA/GOAL member, avid shooter, or even a gun owner doesn't make them an "anti" by default.

Additionally while off the original topic, but since it was brought up, DUI's (thought the end result relates to a lot of issues)...I have a memorable DUI from about a year ago...call was for an erratic operator, following the "trail" (lawn damage, struck curbs, run down stop signs) I find the car has "come to rest" against another vehicle in front of a school...open containers all in the vehicle, driver had already pissed herself in the car, (then again while I attempted to give her field sobriety test, thats always nice...), get her back she blows well over the limit...Oh yeah did I say this was a weekday at about 10 AM...fast forward few months...case is CWOF'd...it was her first time [rolleyes](getting caught)...
So its not that we aren't out there getting them, courts just cut them loose...
 
Dude, this wasn't a statistic or anything. It is just my impression from speaking with many LEOs around Boston. This is also not a hit on the job that LEOs are doing, just understanding the resources of departments are spread so thin. If you have some information that would be useful, I welcome it. Rather than going back an fourth in the thread, please PM me and I would be happy to discuss the matter further. Perhaps you can change my opinion?

A significant chunk of the members at YOUR CLUB (you did say you were a member at MVGC, right?) are working LEOs and are very pro-2A. One even went out of his way to personally sponsor me when I first joined. Maybe you should ask the guys who shoot PPC matches there what they do for work and what they think of the 2A....

Sweeping generalizations ("police tell us we don't need guns") are neither accurate nor called for IMHO.
 
First responders are irrelevant.

By the time they get there, not only has the SHTF, the S ran out and the fan stopped spinning long ago.

Have the skills, tools, and mindset to take care of yourself and yours. Others who aren't so disposed will have to deal with the consequences of their denial and/or laziness.

That is all.

This.
 
First responders are irrelevant.

First responders are ALWAYS irrelevant? I can think of a few situations where that's not necessarily true. For example, you're outnumbered and pinned down - might be nice to have some backup in that situation, no?
 
First responders are ALWAYS irrelevant? I can think of a few situations where that's not necessarily true. For example, you're outnumbered and pinned down - might be nice to have some backup in that situation, no?

By the time they get there I will either be dead, severely hurt, or would have taken care of the problem.

Besides the odd case of a cop being within seconds of you when you need him, yes, they are irrelevant.

Same goes for the FD. When the fire starts in my house, I am there and they are not. By the time they get there I fully expect to not have anything left at all.

I know my POV is going to piss some off, but I don't care. Show me that I am wrong and I will gladly change my position. But I doubt you will be able to. I didn't come to this conclusion on a whim.
 
Back
Top Bottom