MCOPA Executive Directors Report, July 2010...notice something missing here?

[GSG]

http://www.masschiefs.org/page.php?pageid=122

If it is June of an election year in Massachusetts, you can be sure that the Legislature is in high gear as we rapidly approach the July end of the legislative year. There certainly is no limit in the topics for us to talk about.

Just passed was the distracted driving bill that prohibits persons under age 18 from using cell phones or texting while driving. It prohibits texting by all drivers regardless of age and requires elderly drivers over the age of 75 to renew their licenses in person.
The issue of data collection has again come to the forefront and even though the MCOPA has been actively involved in finding common ground with the legislature, there is still a lot of work that needs to be done. One issue that is not debatable is that the flawed bench marks of the 2002 data collection have been universally recognized as unreliable and should not be used again. While there are legislative reasons to attach this proposal to the e-citation proposals, the reality is that it will probably take the state years to pass a bonding issue for the electronic hardware. It makes no sense to rush through such important legislation now and not have it be effective for 5-10 years.

We all knew that the Casino legislation would be difficult, as of this writing, the Senate is in day five of deliberation and the bill is still stalled. I would like to say thank you to every single person that in any way assisted Municipal Policing in convincing the Senate and other Legislators in understanding that “Exclusivity” of jurisdiction is inappropriate when policing in any community. With out getting into the dirt of those who promoted it, it would have been unconscionable to tell a host community that they did not have jurisdiction within their own community. I would like to specifically acknowledge the efforts of EOPSS, Attorney Generals’ office, State Police Command, and the MCOPA for thoroughly discussing and finding an appropriate compromise in this situation.

You'll notice that there's absolutely no mention of H2259...

 

[Reptile]

Deval Patricks one gun a month bill was not mentioned either.

Is that good or bad?

 

[GSG]

Deval Patricks one gun a month bill was not mentioned either.

Is that good or bad?

The one gun a month bill doesn't have anything to do with police chiefs in MA. H2259 does, since it would remove their discretion, and my guess is that they quietly killed it.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

You'll notice that there's absolutely no mention of H2259...

My guess is that they have concluded it is "dead" and not requiring their attention.

 

[LoginName]

My guess is that they have concluded it is "dead" and not requiring their attention.

The bill may or may not be dead, but the battle is far from over and they know it...

SUPREME COURT GUN CONTROL RULING
On June 28th, the US Supreme Court, in a 5-4
decision concerning handgun bans in Chicago and its
suburb of Oak Park, Illinois, ruled for the first time that the
Second Amendment applies to state and local gun control
laws. This ruling expanded the scope of the Second
Amendment’s protection of the right to bear arms. The
Court held that the individual’s right to keep handguns for
self-protection at home is constitutionally protected. The
court sent the case back to a federal appeals court, where
the bans are all but certain to be struck down.

In 2008, the court ruled by the same margin that
the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to
own guns in Washington D.C., striking down a local ban
on handguns and a trigger-lock requirement for other guns
in the district.

The Court said the right was not a blank check,
however, saying states can still pass restrictions, such as
barring possession of guns by felons or the mentally ill and
prohibiting the carrying of guns in schools or government
buildings.

It is likely that challenges will be filed to various
parts of the Massachusetts gun law, including the chief’s
ability to deny an LTC on the basis of suitability. Unless
and until a ruling is issued, chiefs should continue to issue
licenses as they always have. They should also advise
officers to enforce other gun laws where possession –
outside the home – is involved.

http://www.masschiefs.org/documents/...Newsletter.pdf

 

[JackDaniels]

Gotta love the police, right?

 

[Len-2A Training]

Gotta love the [STRIKE]police[/STRIKE] Mass Chiefs Assn, right?

I fixed it for you.

In no way has MCOPA EVER represented the rank and file LEOs on the street. MCOPA's agenda is strictly self-serving for the chiefs and their org and nobody else.

 

[Knuckle Dragger]

I fixed it for you.

In no way has MCOPA EVER represented the rank and file LEOs on the street. MCOPA's agenda is strictly self-serving for the chiefs and their org and nobody else.

That's right! The rank and file have their own organizations to address their self-serving interests.

 

[JGreen]

I fixed it for you.

In no way has MCOPA EVER represented the rank and file LEOs on the street. MCOPA's agenda is strictly self-serving for the chiefs and their org and nobody else.

Good Job Len!

 

[Coyote33]

I fixed it for you.

In no way has MCOPA EVER represented the rank and file LEOs on the street. MCOPA's agenda is strictly self-serving for the chiefs and their org and nobody else.

That's right! The rank and file have their own organizations to address their self-serving interests.

So, who ARE these organizations, and do they vote on issues or have a say? Do they ever have representatives stand by the podium while politicians do what they do?

 

[Len-2A Training]

So, who ARE these organizations, and do they vote on issues or have a say? Do they ever have representatives stand by the podium while politicians do what they do?

MPA (Mass Patrolmens Assn), BPA (Boston Patrolmens Assn), Emerald Society (Irish), there's a Black Officers' Assn (sorry, forgot the name), etc.

And TTBOMK, they do not show up in dress blues beside politicians at press conferences or rallies. They tend to stick to union issues to help their troops, rather than becoming a political org.

 

[RichM]

Don't forget the IBPO. They have an office in East Springfield.

 

[GSG]

In no way has MCOPA EVER represented the rank and file LEOs on the street. MCOPA's agenda is strictly self-serving for the chiefs and their org and nobody else.

Exactly. You can see the division between them & the street guys/gals if you do some reading on their website.

That's right! The rank and file have their own organizations to address their self-serving interests.

You'll notice that the ones serving the real cops are at least moderately pro gun, unlike the chief's associations across the nation.